User:Kenatipo/Sandbox

=Major re-write -- CPCs, PRCs= Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs), also known as pregnancy resource centers (PRCs), are non-profit organizations established to assist women in crisis pregnancies by providing them free and confidential emotional, medical and material support and to inform women of the alternatives to abortion. The goal of pregnancy resource centers is to reduce the number of abortions. CPCs are, with few exceptions, run by pro-life supporters and are typically Christian. Consistent with the Christian pro-life ethic, pregnancy resource centers do not refer women to abortion providers. The major PRC organizations are Birthright International, Heartbeat International, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), and Care Net.

Crisis pregnancy centers provide a range of services including peer counseling, pregnancy testing, STD screening, adoption referrals, financial assistance, prenatal services, child-rearing resources like baby clothes and layettes, and other services. Some CPCs also provide religious counseling. While they provide women with information related to abortion, pregnancy and childbirth, some have been found to disseminate medical information disputed by pro-choice advocates.

There are over 4,000 crisis pregnancy centers in the United States, as compared with well under 750 abortion clinics. Canada has roughly 200 CPCs to about 25 abortion clinics. There are hundreds more CPCs outside of the US and Canada. CPCs are funded by the generosity of the local community and rely heavily on local volunteers for staffing. At least 20 US States provide funding for CPCs. A congressional report found that from 2001 to 2005, 50 CPCs received $30 million in funding from the federal government. By 2006, CPCs had received more than $60 million dollars of federal funding, including funding earmarked for abstinence-only programs. By comparison, Planned Parenthood in the U.S. received $1.2 billion in government funding in the years 2001-2005.

CPC services
Crisis pregnancy centers provide a range of services including pregnancy testing, STD screening, peer counseling, financial assistance, prenatal services, maternity clothes, child-rearing resources like baby clothes and layettes, adoption referrals, 24-hour hotlines, and other services. According to its website, Birthright International "'provides caring, non-judgmental support to girls and women who are distressed by an unplanned pregnancy. Using its own resources and those of the community, Birthright offers positive and loving alternatives. Birthright presents many services and refers for many more. We provide friendship and emotional support, free pregnancy testing, and maternity and baby clothes. We also give information and referrals to help clients meet legal, medical, financial, and housing needs. Birthright treats each woman as an individual who deserves kindness and respect, as well as personal attention to her unique situation. All Birthright services are free, absolutely confidential, and available to any woman regardless of age, race, creed, economic or marital status.'"

An estimated 28,000 women make their first visit to a Birthright chapter every month. Birthright also operates a free 24-hour help hotline for North America. Most CPCs offer free pregnancy tests and many are obtaining medical clinic licenses so that sonograms may be offered to help convince women to carry their pregnancies to term. Crisis pregnancy centers are often located near abortion clinics  and in the past the majority were not licensed as medical clinics. More than 700 of NIFLA's 1200 affiliates are licensed medical clinics.

Some CPCs offer peer counseling for women who have recently had abortions. Many post-abortion or abortion-recovery counselors cite evidence that abortion causes mental health problems. Peer counselors are typically covered by mandated reporting laws with regard to statutory rape, and are encouraged to ask about the age of the woman and the biological father. Services offered by PRCs are confidential. Most centers do not offer artificial contraception and among the few that do, the service may be limited to married women.

Some CPCs offer Bible study sessions.

Use of sonograms
About a quarter of pregnancy resource centers conduct free sonograms as a way to persuade women not to abort. Substantial anecdotal evidence indicates that a high percentage of women who visit pregnancy resource centers and see (through ultrasound) the young life inside them decide against abortion, although no scientific study has examined this evidence. Colorado-based Focus on the Family had the goal of equipping 800 CPCs with ultrasound machines by 2010, through its "Option Ultrasound" program. The Southern Baptist Convention — the largest Protestant denomination in the United States—has formed an Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) which works to equip more CPCs with ultrasound machines, through what they call the "Psalm 139 Project". ERLC President Richard Land wrote: "If wombs had windows, people would be much more reticent to abort babies because they would be forced to confront the evident humanity of the baby from very early gestation onward." Since January 2009, the Knights of Columbus Ultrasound Initiative has placed more than 70 ultrasound machines in medically certified pro-life pregnancy resource centers. "'Reports indicate that up to 90 percent of women considering an abortion choose to have their baby after seeing an ultrasound image. They hear their baby’s heartbeat, they see their baby’s head and fingers. They know it is a child, not a “choice.”'"

Affiliation
Most crisis pregnancy centers are affiliated with one of three major pro-life organizations that fund CPCs; these are Care Net, Heartbeat International, and Birthright International. Care Net is the largest network of CPCs in North America, with 1,100 centers advising over 350,000 women annually. Heartbeat International is associated with over 1,000 centers. In 2003, Birthright had more than 400 chapters worldwide and had been in operation for 35 years. Some CPCs are affiliated with multiple organizations at once, so the sum does not reflect the total. The largest UK organisations are CareConfidential and LifeUK.

Ireland
In Ireland (where abortion is illegal except when pregnancy endangers the mother's life) the government has created the Crisis Pregnancy Programme (formerly the Crisis Pregnancy Agency), a nation-wide working group to address crisis pregnancies. One of its objectives is to reduce the number of women who opt for abortion, though in contrast to American crisis pregnancy centers, the primary method it uses in pursuit of this goal is the provision of "services and supports which make other options more attractive." The CPP funds crisis pregnancy initiatives and is in turn reimbursed by the Health Service Executive.

Federal funding
As of July, 2006, 50 CPCs had received federal funding. Between 2001 and 2006, over $60 million in federal funds were given to crisis pregnancy centers.

State funding
In 2006, 20 U.S. states subsidized crisis pregnancy centers. These included Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania and Texas.

In 24 U.S. states, individuals can support CPCs by purchasing Choose Life license plates. Motorists in these states can request these plates and pay an extra fee, a portion of which is used by the state to fund adoption support organizations and crisis pregnancy centers.

Criticisms, legal and legislative action against PRCs
It has been alleged that some pregnancy resource centers have provided false or misleading medical information. Legal and legislative action in response to CPCs has typically focused on their advertising practices, and has usually resulted in the CPCs in question being obliged to make clear statements about the services they offer. CPCs may describe themselves as offering "abortion alternatives," or with another term that indicates that they do not assist clients in obtaining an abortion. However, in the past, some falsely advertised that they offered abortion services. Pro-choice supporters have also pointed out that they use rhetoric and advertising language similar to those of abortion providers - for example, "Plan Your Parenthood" or a directory listing under "abortion services" or "clinics" - and object to the use of such techniques which they say may mislead pregnant women seeking abortion into contacting a CPC.

Controversy about false or misleading medical information
Pro-choice advocates have routinely claimed that CPCs give out false medical information. In a few cases, such information may be based on decades-old studies that have been discredited by more recent research. In others, CPCs claim an existing scientific consensus in favor of such information. The information is usually about the supposed health risks of abortion. Pro-choice advocates point out that the centers fail to mention that "the risk of death in childbirth is 12 times as high." Some centers say that "terminating a pregnancy is far more dangerous than carrying a baby to term," although the opposite is the case.

One common piece of alleged medical misinformation is the assertion of a link between abortion and breast cancer. One crisis pregnancy center counselor is reported to have told a client that "50 percent of women who have an abortion get breast cancer and 30 percent die within a year of the procedure"; others claimed an 80% increase, a 50% increase or more, or a doubled increase in the cancer risk, or said that a client with breast cancer in her family would certainly get cancer and die if she had an abortion. Major medical bodies including the National Cancer Institute say that there is no link between abortion and breast cancer.

The relationship between induced abortion and mental health is an area of controversy. CPC counselors are reported to have conveyed various supposed psychological consequences of abortion, including high rates of depression, "post-abortion syndrome," post-traumatic stress disorder, suicide, substance abuse, sexual and relationship issues, and other emotional problems. Figures included a 50% chance of long-term emotional problems or trauma, nine in ten women suffering "post-abortion syndrome," and a sevenfold increase in the suicide rate; one center said that anyone who had had an abortion was certain to experience mental health problems like those suffered by Vietnam veterans. Neither the American Psychiatric Association nor the American Psychological Association recognizes the existence of "post-abortion syndrome," and an American Psychological Association review of relevant studies found that "abortion is usually psychologically benign."

Some CPCs may also claim that surgical abortion is a dangerous procedure, with a high risk of perforation or infection. Several reports mention that a CPC described or depicted a woman dying as a result of the procedure. However, fewer than 0.3% of women who have abortions experience complications that necessitate hospitalization. The alleged risk of perforation and infection is also part of the assertion that abortion negatively impacts future childbearing, by increasing the risk of infertility, miscarriages, complications, ectopic pregnancy, or fetal health problems. One center claimed that there was a one in four chance of not being able to carry another pregnancy. These claims are not supported by medical data.

Some CPCs apparently have been found to disseminate alleged misinformation about birth control methods, in particular the idea that contraception and condoms do not work or have harmful effects. Some counselors said that "all condoms are defective and have slots and holes in them" or that they fail "something like 40 percent of the time." Other centers said that condoms were permeable to HIV, or that hormonal contraceptives had abortifacient effects and did long-term harm to women's health, such as causing infertility and cancer.

Other allegedly false information may concern the methodology of pregnancy tests, the advisability of STI testing on pregnant women,, the comparative risks of abortion at different stages of pregnancy, descriptions of female anatomy, or the rate of postpartum depression among women who carry to term.

Court cases
In 1986, the North Dakota Supreme Court judged that the Fargo Women's Help Clinic, a CPC, had engaged in "false and deceptive advertising" by choosing a name similar to the Fargo Women's Health Organization and by advertising that they provided abortions. The Help Clinic argued that, because it received no money from its clients and its statements were in support of a position rather than for commercial gain, they were exempt from regulations on commercial speech, but the court ruled that the CPC's advertisements were "placed in a commercial context and...directed at the providing of services rather than toward an exchange of ideas" and thus were not exempt. The court upheld a preliminary injunction forbidding the Help Clinic from using a deceptive name or advertising that they provided abortions.

In 1994, the Center for Unplanned Pregnancy, a San Diego CPC, was legally determined to have engaged in false advertisement. This resulted in it being court-ordered to tell every client that it did not provide abortions or abortion referrals and that its counseling was "from a Biblical anti-abortion perspective," and to stop advertising under "clinics," "abortion service providers," "birth control information" or "pregnancy options counseling" in the telephone directory. The court also disallowed the center from providing pregnancy tests. The other CPCs involved in the case settled out of court and agreed to change their advertising practices.

Other CPCs have been enjoined from providing pregnancy tests without a license or advertising pregnancy tests as "free" if they are conditional upon hearing a presentation or counseling.

Spitzer investigation
In January 2002, then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer launched an investigation into alleged deceptive business practices of 24 crisis pregnancy centers across the State and issued subpoenas to 11 of them. Spitzer's investigation was criticized as politically motivated harassment on behalf of political allies like NARAL Pro-Choice America. In February 2002, a number of the targeted crisis pregnancy centers filed motions in New York State court against the Attorney General's office, seeking to quash the subpoenas. Later that same month, Spitzer withdrew all the subpoenas. However, the Attorney General's office also worked out an agreement with one of the CPCs in question, intended to be used as a model, which sets out practices including informing clients that the center does not provide abortion or birth control, that it is not a licensed medical facility, and that the pregnancy tests it provides are over-the-counter. (Spitzer credited NARAL-NY with helping him win election in 1998. In 2008, Spitzer resigned in disgrace as Governor of New York when it was learned he had liaisons with a prostitute.)

Waxman Report
In 2006, Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) led an investigation of taxpayer-funded CPCs and found that they provided "false and misleading information" on an alleged link between abortion and breast cancer, on the alleged effects of abortion on fertility, and on the alleged mental health effects of abortion. Waxman's investigation consisted of placing "undercover" telephone calls to 23 of the 4,000 American CPCs and reviewing their websites. (Congressman Waxman routinely earns a 100% approval rating from NARAL and a 0% approval rating from the National Right to Life Committee.)

The summary of the report states:

The individuals who contact federally funded pregnancy resource centers are often vulnerable teenagers, who are susceptible to being misled and need medically accurate information to help them make a fully informed decision. The vast majority of pregnancy resource centers contacted for this report, however, provided false or misleading information about the health risks of an abortion. This may advance the mission of the pregnancy resource centers, which are typically pro-life organizations dedicated to preventing abortion, but it is an inappropriate public health practice.

Pro-life groups criticized Waxman's report, alleging that it contained inaccuracies and distortions.

"Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act"
On March 30, 2006, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and eleven co-sponsors introduced a bill called the "Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act", which would have required the Federal Trade Commission to "promulgate rules prohibiting...persons from advertising with the intent to deceptively create the impression that such persons provide abortion services" and "enforce violations of such rules as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices." Maloney said of CPCs, "When women are making a health decision, they should never be subject to deceit and trickery... Some of these Crisis Pregnancy Centers should be called ‘Counterfeit Pregnancy Centers.’ They have the right to exist, but they shouldn’t have the right to deceive in order to advance their particular beliefs." The bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection but died there. Maloney reintroduced the bill in 2007 in the Democratic-controlled 110th Congress, but the bill again died in committee. Maloney, along with Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), again reintroduced the bill in July 2010 in the Democratic-led 111th Congress. It was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and once again it did not progress. (Congresswoman Maloney routinely earns a 100% approval rating from NARAL and a 0% approval rating from the National Right to Life Committee.)

Local ordinances
Baltimore, Maryland, Montgomery County, Maryland, and Austin, Texas require CPCs to post signs about the nature of the services they offer. Baltimore requires them to disclose that they do not offer or refer clients for abortion, Austin requires that statement to be made about both abortion and birth control, and Montgomery County requires them to disclose that they do not employ licensed medical professionals. The Archdiocese of Baltimore, as well as a Maryland CPC, have filed lawsuits claiming that the laws violate their freedom of speech. The New York City Council is considering a similar law.

Religious affiliation
The overwhelming majority of CPCs in the US are Christian ministries which are affiliated with a Christian organization. Some are run by the Catholic Church or by other church groups. According to Waxman's report in 2006, 50 CPCs are funded by the federal government. A Jewish CPC, called "In Shifra's Arms," also exists.

Many CPCs require their staff to be Christian. For example, as a condition of affiliation, Care Net and CAPSS, the two largest CPC organizations in the United States and Canada respectively, require each employee and volunteer of a prospective affiliate to comply with a statement of faith. CPCs unaffiliated with either of these may also require staff to be Christian. Religious activity is sometimes part of a CPC customer's experience: Care Net claims to have effected over 23,000 conversions or restatements of Christian faith, and some visitors to CPCs report that employees subjected them to unwanted evangelizing.

The largest CPC network, NIFLA, "strongly believes that sharing the Gospel is an essential part of counseling women in pregnancy help medical clinics". Care Net is explicitly evangelistic in nature, and says that its "ultimate aim...is to share the love and truth of Jesus Christ in both word and deed" and that its "pregnancy centers are committed to sharing the love of Jesus Christ with every person who walks through their doors." Heartbeat International, one of the largest CPC networks in the United States and also the largest CPC network in the world, describes itself as a "Christian association of faith-based pregnancy resource centers" whose materials are "consistent with Biblical principles." Birthright International has a stated philosophy of non-evangelism. Unaffiliated CPCs, or CPCs affiliated with other organizations, generally provide a religious perspective in their counseling.

CPCs outside the United States are also frequently Christian. CareConfidential, the largest umbrella network for CPCs in the United Kingdom, runs "Christian-based pregnancy crisis centres" and is a division of the Christian charity CARE. The Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services, a similar network in Canada whose centers may also affiliate with Care Net or Heartbeat International, describes itself as a "Christian charity" ; its affiliates "adhere firmly to Christianity." The United States-based Human Life International runs "Catholic pregnancy centers" in Mexico and also provides aid to the Centros de Ayuda para la Mujer, a network of CPCs in Latin America whose philosophy is "in conformity with the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church." As in the United States, unaffiliated CPCs may also be run by church groups or otherwise Christian.

Other criticisms
Some crisis pregnancy centers advertise in a manner called deceptive by "the Texas Attorney General, the North Dakota Supreme Court, the Federal Centers for Disease Control, the National Organization for Women, the New York Metropolitan Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights", "NARAL Pro Choice America, Planned Parenthood Federation of America[,] the National Abortion Federation, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union". In particular, the advertising approach of the Pearson Foundation, which assists local groups establishing CPCs, has been criticized by some other pro-life groups, including Birthright International, another CPC operator. The foundation recommends that a center seek out women who want abortions through "neutral" advertising, and refuse to answer questions that would reveal that they provide neither abortion services nor referrals to abortion services.

Critics charge that CPC administrators portray their businesses as "medical facilities", when they do not have professional licensing from local or state health departments, and are staffed primarily with volunteers rather than medical professionals. A 2002 Washington Post article noted that Planned Parenthood disagreed with the way CPC administrators presented their organizations.

Pro-choice organizations like Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation have criticized CPCs' dissemination of disputed medical information such as that found in the Waxman report or by other unaffiliated visitors to CPCs.

Pregnancy Resource Centers and networks

 * Birthright International official website
 * Care Net official website
 * Heartbeat International official website
 * NIFLA official website

Pro-life positions

 * About Pregnancy Centers, Epigee Women's Health
 * Pro-Abortionists Crank Up Campaign to Mislead Public, National Right to Life Committee
 * A N.Y. Witch Hunt - Intolerant Attack on Pro-life Pregnancy Centers, New York Post
 * National Poll Affirms CPC Movement, Assist Pregnancy Center
 * LifeNews.com, with many articles on CPCs

Pro-choice positions

 * Crisis Pregnancy Centers, National Abortion Federation
 * The Truth about Crisis Pregnancy Centers, NARAL Pro-Choice America

Articles in pro-choice newspapers

 * States React to Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Washington Post, May 9, 2007
 * Antiabortion Centers Offer Sonograms to Further Cause, Washington Post, September 9, 2006
 * Some Abortion Foes Forgo Politics for Quiet Talk, New York Times, January 16, 2006

Category:Pro-life movement Category:Pregnancy