Federal Bill Puts Crisis Pregnancy Centers in the Crosshairs

LifeSiteNews.com -- Your Life, Family, and Culture Outpost ^ | July 9, 2010

[topher]

Friday July 9, 2010

---

Federal Bill Puts Crisis Pregnancy Centers in the Crosshairs

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 9, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Pro-life pregnancy centers, which focus on providing free resources and information to women in crisis pregnancies to allow them to keep their babies, are facing a new attack from pro-abortion groups, and this time through Congress.

U.S. Rep. Maloney (D-NY) and Sen. Menendez (D-NJ) are sponsoring a bill that would demand the Federal Trade Commission develop advertising rules that would restrict the ability of pro-life pregnancy centers to reach out to women with crisis pregnancies.
 
Maloney’s "Stop Deceptive Advertising in Women's Services Act" (H.R. 2478) purports to stop “any person from advertising with the intent to deceptively create the impression that such person is a provider of abortion services if such person does not provide abortion services.”

"This bill is not at all what it sounds like," said Joe Young, President of Heartbeat International, which is an association of more than 1,100 pregnancy help centers, maternity homes, non-profit adoption agencies, pregnancy help medical clinics and abortion recovery programs in 50 countries.

"Pregnancy centers are reducing the number of abortion sales and this aggravates the abortion industry. A more accurate name for this bill might be 'Stop Alternatives to Abortion Advertising to Pay Back the Abortion Industry Act.' This is an attempt to prevent women who deserve choices from connecting with pregnancy help centers."

Vicki Saporta, President and CEO of the National Abortion Federation (NAF) charged that most CPCs “do not offer comprehensive reproductive health care options or medically accurate information.”

But Heartbeat International says that its affiliates have pledged to uphold the "Commitment of Care and Competence," which is the set of operating principles CPCs abide by. This commitment requires that all advertising and client communications be truthful and accurately describe the services offered – namely, providing accurate information about pregnancy, fetal development, abortion procedures and risks, lifestyle issues, and related concerns.

Based upon the recent actions of NARAL, it would appear that the abortion group is much more interested in shutting CPCs down, period, than simply stopping what they call "deceptive" advertising. NARAL recently sent a letter to YellowPages.com and SuperPages.com, asking the phone directories to remove all advertisements for CPCs.

Heartbeat pointed out that one of the “deceptive” practices that NARAL Virginia has accused CPCs of using was a roadside billboard reading "Pregnant? Need help? Call 800-395-HELP." This was deemed deceptive because the women answering the phone for the helpline do not recommend abortion.

Crisis pregnancy centers have been under vigorous sustained assault in recent years for providing women alternatives to abortion. Abortion advocates have been especially furious that CPCs would install themselves in the same neighborhoods as abortion clinics, or even right across from their premises.

Joan Malin, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of New York City, emphasized this point when she complained that CPCs were “deliberately confus[ing] women by establishing themselves near legitimate reproductive health care centers.  These fake clinics have opened in close proximity to our Brooklyn and Bronx centers, misleading clients seeking the unbiased care that Planned Parenthood provides.”

“Planned Parenthood knows that women are completely capable of making the best decision for themselves and their families - without coercion, intimidation or lies,” she added.

Pro-lifers, however, have pointed out the irony of Planned Parenthood charging CPC’s with not providing “accurate” information. “Coercion, intimidation, and lies” (in the words of PP New York CEO Malin) are at the very heart of a crisis of credibility that Planned Parenthood has experienced in recent years.

A series of sting operations conducted by pro-life journalists with a group called Live Action have revealed that on numerous occasions Planned Parenthood employees have engaged in grossly unethical practices such as giving clients medically inaccurate information about fetal development, advising minors how to bypass the state’s parental consent laws, or even assisting minors in obtaining an illegal abortion that would cover up statutory rape.

CPCs, on the other hand, have had to deal with the problem of abortion clinics posing as places that offer “abortion alternatives.” In 2006, Expectant Mother Care-EMC FrontLine Pregnancy Centers filed suit against "Dr. Emily's" abortion facilities with sites in the Bronx and downtown Brooklyn, because it was using "Abortion Alternatives" advertising to bring women into their abortuaries.

 

See related stories on LifeSiteNews.com:

Suit Challenges Regulations Hitting Crisis Pregnancy Centers
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10052105.html

Archdiocese Fights Baltimore Over City’s Pregnancy Center Restrictions
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10033005.html

Planned Parenthood Caught on Tape Lying about Pre-Natal Development
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/dec/09120906.html

Fate of Washington Bill to Hobble Pregnancy Centers Remains Uncertain
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10020107.html

Abortion Clinic Sued for Posing as a Pro-Life Crisis Pregnancy Center
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/sep/06092109.html

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jul/10070913.html

---

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.

[topher]

Apparently Crisis Pregnancy Centers are earning the wrath of the WELL FINANCED ABORTION industry since they significantly reduce the number of abortions.

[topher]

prolife ping

[DallasDeb]

What about free speech. We all see false advertising in all types of media (not that I think Crisis Pregnancy Centers are false advertisers).

If anything, the abortion clinics are false advertisers because they claim to "help" their clients. Curse on them all!

[LiteKeeper]

Amazing. Murderers are yelling foul against those that are trying to prevent a murder.

BTW - what 'alternatives' does Planned Parenthood offer?

[topher]

We need a MALONEY IS FULL OF BALONEY counterattack because of this bill -- HR2478!!!

[topher]

Hardcore pro-aborts in House (co-sponsors of bill):

Rep. Carolyn Maloney [D-NY14]
Cosponsors:
Neil Abercrombie [D-HI1]
Tammy Baldwin [D-WI2]
Howard Berman [D-CA28]
Lois Capps [D-CA23]
Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
Susan Davis [D-CA53]
Anna Eshoo [D-CA14]
Sam Farr [D-CA17]
Barney Frank [D-MA4]
Raul Grijalva [D-AZ7]
Alcee Hastings [D-FL23]
Rush Holt [D-NJ12]
Patrick Kennedy [D-RI1]
Dennis Kucinich [D-OH10]
Barbara Lee [D-CA9]
Sander Levin [D-MI12]
Zoe Lofgren [D-CA16]
Edward Markey [D-MA7]
Betty McCollum [D-MN4]
James McDermott [D-WA7]
James McGovern [D-MA3]
Bradley Miller [D-NC13]
Gwen Moore [D-WI4]
James Moran [D-VA8]
Frank Pallone [D-NJ6]
David Price [D-NC4]
Steven Rothman [D-NJ9]
Linda Sánchez [D-CA39]
Janice Schakowsky [D-IL9]
Hilda Solis [D-CA32]
John Tierney [D-MA6]
Robert Wexler [D-FL19]
Lynn Woolsey [D-CA6]

I don't see ANY DEAD MEMBERS of Congress in the co-sponsors (there was a Congressman from Pennsylvania who recently passed away), but there is the LAME DUCK PATRICK KENNEDY who has been ex-communicated over his pro-abort views...

[topher]

You are referring, of course, to the hypocracy of the abortion movement that it is pro-choice.

Yet when someone offers an alternative to abortion (adoption), they cry foul that CHOICE is being taken away.

They claim they represent CHOICE and that they are PRO-CHOICE.

They remind of people who ran Germany in the 1930's and 1940s' (who Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, allied herself with -- the MASTER RACE movement).

[GeronL]

They don’t want “choice” they want more abortions. that much is obvious.

[Red6]

Abortion is a business that lives off of fear.

Take away the fear, and their entire empire with their profits go away.

There is in all maybe a .5% group of women that get abortions where one can argue that this was necessitated and a mercy-full act. Consider Anencephaly as an example.

However, what has happened, is that the .5% where there is a real argument, possibly even a ethical and merciful case for such intervention is abused by 99.5% for whom this is simply a matter of convenience. Abortion in America is all about convenience, nothing more. The exceptions are used as an argument for what has in reality become the norm.

There are tens of thousands of couples wanting to adopt a baby. Some are willing to pay tens of thousands, accept handicapped kids, children of another race, travel abroad......... You have in most states of the US rules that require any police and fire station as well as hospital to take in a baby “no questions asked.” You have federal, state, and local as well as regious institutions that will support a mother. You have a plethora of health care services at federal, state, county and city level as well as charitable organizations to provide health care essentially for free. So why do we really have these abortions? It's about inconvenience and in some cases it's about hiding the results of ones own behavior.

The problem with the topic of abortion is that it's an all or nothing subject. There is no such thing as a ethical and moral application of this procedure. Even the smallest crack in the door will allow those for abortion to squeeze nearly anyone through because the hedonist does not care and the business side wants to make money. Basically, it always turns into a completely permissive environment even if politically sold to only be used in rare and extreme situations (The incest and rape argument etc) where their is a real need for the mothers health etc. So yes, it needs to be categorically outlawed. If you want an example of a “slippery slope,” abortion would be a great one.

[topher]

I guess the PRO-ABORTION movement is the KING of Deceptive Advertizing -- which is what they claim is at the heart of this bill.

Maybe the BILL should apply to Planned Parenthood and NAF as well...

On this point, the bill should be contested all the way to SCOTUS (US Supreme Court)

[Lexinom]

"misleading clients seeking the unbiased care that Planned Parenthood provides.”

Huh?

[dtrpscout]

Liberal women think Islam isn’t really so bad for Muslim women because they get stoned and commit adultery (wait....or was that the other way around????)

[Gene Eric]

>> Vicki Saporta, NAF, charged that most CPCs “do not offer comprehensive reproductive health care options or medically accurate information.”

Consider the most cynical viewpoint to understand what this is about : to profit from the killing of unborn humans.

“Comprehensive reproductive health care” should not include the killing of healthy human life. The phrase usage is not only deceptive, but implies that killing is an acceptable health care option.

These people are sick!

[exDemMom]

Any abortion mill that advertises or tells its prospective clients that the child within the womb is either not alive, or it is alive but unable to feel (the story changes to fit the client) is outright lying.

Would the law apply to them?

[topher]

The law talks only about abortion services and providers. It is meant to target anyone who might provide the allusion they provide abortion services when they in fact do not.

The law is trying to close something that infuriates the abortion industry -- pregnant women sometimes confuse CPC's with abortion mills.

Most CPCs (Crisis Pregnancy Centers) are listed under Abortion Alternatives.

However, the title that Rep. Mahoney wants for this bill is:

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services Act’’.

If the title of the act is meant to portray what the act is supposed to do, then Planned Parenthood and NARAL should be in trouble from this act as well.

With that said, here is the key text of the bill (judge for yourself):

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING OF ABORTION SERVICES. (a) CONDUCT PROHIBITED.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission shall promulgate rules to prohibit, as an unfair and deceptive act or practice, any person from advertising with the intent to deceptively create the impression that such person is a provider of abortion services if such person does not provide abortion services. (b) ENFORCEMENT.—The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce the rules required under subsection (a) as if a violation of such rules were a violation of section 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1)). The Commission shall enforce such rules in the same manner and by the same means, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and made a part of this Act.