Susan G. Komen Foundation Drops Funding For Planned Parenthood

[Conan71]

I suspect the PR fallout from this will actually result in PP making back much more in direct contributions than what they lost from Komen.  I've been seeing a lot of chatter that makes it look that way on Facebook if that's any sort of bellwether for people's actions.

Curious to see if Race For The Cure takes a huge hit on entries this next year.

Considering the annual contribution to Planned Parenthood was something like .001% of Komen's annual revenues, I'd say they lost a crap ton of goodwill over a very small amount of money. 

[nathanm]

I'd say they lost a crap ton of goodwill over a very small amount of money. 

That's what happens when partisan demagogues take control and foist their ideology on a nonpartisan organization. It would be one thing if PP had a history of using funds earmarked for other purposes to fund abortions, but they don't. If anything, they are probably the biggest single preventer of abortions in the US today, although many Catholics probably take exception to their method of doing so.

I like how their rationale has changed. First it was because PP was "under investigation" and now it's because they're "inefficient." I wonder what's next.

[Townsend]

I like how their rationale has changed. First it was because PP was "under investigation" and now it's because they're "inefficient." I wonder what's next.

Satan

[Conan71]

[Townsend]

That is who said it in my head when I wrote it.  Dana Carvey is tattooed in my brain.

[Townsend]

CNN FB post:

Breaking News: Susan G. Komen for the Cure to restore Planned Parenthood breast cancer screening funds, Sen. Frank Lautenberg says.

[Conan71]

Wise move, but this has been a PR clusterfark for them.  They've been exposed for political activism which I think will still blunt their fund-raising for the next year or two.

[Townsend]

Wise move, but this has been a PR clusterfark for them.  They've been exposed for political activism which I think will still blunt their fund-raising for the next year or two.

There be a large quantity of taint on them.

[Teatownclown]

So much for the politically correct....

[we vs us]

Damage is done.  They're going to lose a lot of $$ this year for that.

As an aside:  it's incredible the amount of brand damage two days on social media time can cause. Mi esposa, who works in social media, calls it the strength of slacktivism -- or activism from the couch.  A facebook post coupled with a small donation made from your laptop multiplied by a hundred thousand can cause major movements in record time.  It's in the same family as the Arab Spring stuff, and the OWS stuff.  Social media is used as an organizing tool, but it also seems to function on a bigger level as well . . . as a method to align opinion quickly, as a method to evolve ideas and action quickly.  It's just really really fast people power, and I guarantee you that one of the major tech threads of the next century will be how large bureaucracies of the world (not just govs, but also corps) try to limit that power. 

I mean look how out of control the Komen got from their point of view.  And how fast.  And isn't that the point of bureaucracy?  To limit uncertainty and to solidify what might not be solid? To keep collateral damage from things like this to marginal degrees?  There's just no way that the kind of power we're seeing doesn't get capped in some form.   

[Conan71]

I don't care for the abortion-side of PP's business.  Pure and simple.  As a personal option, I'm glad I was never put in a position to help make a decision like that, but I feel it's a decision that is up to a woman and between her and her spiritual higher power if she has one.  It bothers me to the core when women use abortion as their primary form of birth control.

If PP did not have a reputation for co-mingling funds and Komen funds were specific to mammogram screenings, all Komen was doing was potentially removing an important screening process to those who otherwise could not afford the screening.  I'm a huge believer in early detection and making sure every woman can get the proper screening in a timely manner regardless of their economic situation.  I've known far too many women and men who have died from this disease, it's slow, painful and I've seen people in remission have it come back as a bone cancer.  It also runs in my family and FMC's, so I have legit concerns for my mother, my daughters and my future wife.  My family all has good health plans so being able to get timely screenings is not a concern, but it is for many others.

Aside from that singular issue, I was somewhat disturbed from digging deeper into the financials at how much these cancer foundations spend on "education" and "government relations" rather than treatment, research, or screening funding.  I'm also pissed off to no end that these foundations are becoming political tools.

Needless to say, FMC and I won't be participating in any RFTC events this year.

[nathanm]

I don't think anyone prefers that abortion be used as a primary form of birth control. You may or may not know that PP also (usually) provides the whole spectrum of women's health services, including contraceptives, IUDs and other forms of birth control. That's the vast majority of what they do.

If you look at the statistics available on abortions (I think I've detailed them here in the distant past), you'll find that most women who have abortions have only one in their lifetime, and the vast majority of the remainder have only two. The whole serial abortion as birth control thing is something that isn't really supported by the evidence.

[Conan71]

I don't think anyone prefers that abortion be used as a primary form of birth control. You may or may not know that PP also (usually) provides the whole spectrum of women's health services, including contraceptives, IUDs and other forms of birth control. That's the vast majority of what they do.

If you look at the statistics available on abortions (I think I've detailed them here in the distant past), you'll find that most women who have abortions have only one in their lifetime, and the vast majority of the remainder have only two. The whole serial abortion as birth control thing is something that isn't really supported by the evidence.

Statistics are meaningless when you are holding the hand of a dear friend who wants to commit suicide because she's so horrified by what she's just done.  Statistics are meaningless when your stepdaughter admits she's been reckless and stupid and that she's far too irresponsible to carry a baby to full term even for someone else to adopt.  Statistics are meaningless to another friend whose womb was so scarred from a couple of abortions, she was incapable of bearing a child.

I made it perfectly clear I'm fine with abortion services being available to those who seek and need them.  It doesn't mean I need to agree with it as a personal choice, nor do I care to have someone attempt to sway my personal moral code with vacuous statistics.  Just because I'm not screaming my approval of abortion nor the fact that I've never caused the need for one doesn't mean I haven't lived through it with people who were close to me.

[nathanm]

I didn't say you should like it (even I would prefer people not need/want them!), I'm only saying that claiming that serial abortions are actually a "thing" that we need to deal with doesn't comport with the facts. I'm sure it happens, but I'm also quite sure it's very rare.

That contention is one I'm particularly sensitive to, as it is one of the more commonly cited "reasons" for the anti-choice folks to trot out as justification for their thinking they should be in control of women's bodies.

[Townsend]

Top Susan G. Komen Official Resigns After Planned Parenthood Flap

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-official-resigns-after-planned-parenthood-flap/?abcnews&abcnewsdotcom

A top official at the Susan G. Komen for the Cure breast cancer foundation resigned today following the charity's decision to reverse its policy barring funding for Planned Parenthood.

Karen Handel, a former Republican gubernatorial candidate in Georgia, denied in her resignation letter that she had anything to do with the decision to end funding for Planned Parenthood, which she says was made under guidelines formulated before she was hired.

Critics of the foundation's decision linked the move to Handel, a vocal opponent of abortion and Planned Parenthood.

"I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it. I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen's future and the women we serve," she wrote in the letter that was obtained by several media outlets. "However, the decision to update our granting model was made before I joined Komen, and the controversy related to Planned Parenthood has long been a concern to the organization. Neither the decision nor the changes themselves were based on anyone's political beliefs or ideology."

"What was a thoughtful and thoroughly reviewed decision — one that would have indeed enabled Komen to deliver even greater community impact — has unfortunately been turned into something about politics. This is entirely untrue. This development should sadden us all greatly," she added.

Handel declined a severance package.

The Susan G. Komen foundation confirmed Handel's resignation and acknowledged "mistakes" in the way it handled the controversy that erupted last week.

"We have made mistakes in how we have handled recent decisions and take full accountability for what has resulted, but we cannot take our eye off the ball when it comes to our mission," the organization's chief executive and founder, Nancy Brinker, said in a statement. "Today I accepted the resignation of Karen Handel... I have known Karen for many years, and we both share a common commitment to our organization's lifelong mission, which must always remain our sole focus. I wish her the best in future endeavors."