My thoughts on the Susan G. Koman foundation fiasco.

So I turned on the radio to my local NPR station, and it seems that the Susan G. Koman foundation is saying that their decision to no longer fund Planned Parenthood is NOT about the pending harrassment (congressional investigation).

I’ve tended to notice in my time that the more times a story changes, the more likely it is to be a complete fabrication. I’ve also noticed that organizations tend to follow the political leanings of their leadership. Given that the Senior Vice President for Public Policy of the Susan G. Koman foundation is Karen Handel, an outspoken critic of Planned Parenthood, any attempt to suggest that this was NOT a political move becomes almost laughable at it’s face.

The latest explanation from the Susan G. Koman foundation is that the funding was not pulled because of the newly created rule that denies organizations under investigation from receiving grant monies (even though Planned Parenthood would be the only organization so affected), but rather that Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms. This explanation also fails, at face value, to pass muster because many (if not most) of the women that Planned Parenthood serves have not yet reached an age where mammograms are indicated. For such young women, a manual breast exam, and training in self-exams are the most effective tools to detect early cancers. And given that such a large number of young women receive most of their health care from Planned Parenthood, any cuts in funding to provide breast exam services from Planned parenthood will have a direct and negative impact on the health of young women.

Thus, it is clear to me that this decision by the Susan G. Koman foundation was nothing but a political choice by people who do not like the fact that a small portion of what Planned Parenthood does, is to provide abortion services. Now I don’t mind if people don’t like abortion. I don’t like the use of abortion as some sort of convenient method to end a pregnancy. If you’re going to be sexually active, you ought to prepare for the consequences. But I’m also realistic enough to know that the unexpected happens, that complications result, and that sometimes difficult decisions need to be made. I also know that in countries where abortion is illegal, it happens at least as often as in those places where it is legal – it is simply much more dangerous. The best way to keep abortion rates low is to keep it legal, and to educate our young people in the methods of prevention.

The backlash that the Susan G. Koman foundation is receiving, no matter what the reason that this funding was dropped, is deserved. Even if the foundation had a reason other than the fact that Planned Parenthood provides abortions, the foundation showed incredibly poor judgment in the handling of this situation. If they wished that Planned Parenthood clinics provide mammogram services, that could have been communicated, and some sort of funding put in place for the purchase of such machines – or at the very least, some sort of communication as to the changing requirements for grant renewal might have been made so that Planned Parenthood could have prepared for the changes. But now, it seems that the Susan G. Koman foundation has discredited itself in a major way, meaning that they will suffer, along with every other organization that received funding from them.

An organization that began with a laudable mission, and which did incredible and amazing work, has self-destructed on the altar of conservatism. And Planned Parenthood, which has a solitary mission of helping young women when none other will, despite the loss of funding from the Susan G. Koman foundation, will survive and continue its work. Many other organizations are stepping up to fill the void. And what’s the lesson here? It’s a lesson of primary purposes. When you place your primary purpose second to a political one, you will fail. The Susan G. Koman foundation might survive, but its reputation is now tarnished. Public SORT Michael Lockard