Breaking: Judge enjoins NYC rule attacking pregnancy care centers
UPDATE, 1:40p: Just spoke with Tom Glessner, founder of National Institute of Family and Life Advocates and also an attorney, and he had great insights: “The court victories against these anti-pregnancy resource center ordinances serve as a turning point in this legal battle. Let all municipal councils beware that attempts to restrict the free speech of prcs now subjects them to serious civil liability risks.”
2:07p: Great news. New York City has become the second of three major cities* where pro-abortion edicts attempting to force pregnancy care centers to post signage that they do not commit abortions are meeting constitutional resistance.
Congrats to LifeSiteNews.com, which broke the story:
A federal district court judge on Wednesday granted a preliminary injunction blocking a New York City gag law against local pro-life pregnancy centers, which would have gone into effect tomorrow.
Int. No. 371 would have forced pregnancy centers to prominently state whether they provide abortions at its premises and on its advertising, a mandate hailed by NARAL Pro-Choice New York as a sign of the city council’s “commitment to choice” after it passed in March.
I just spoke with Chris Slattery of EMC Pregnancy Centers in NYC, who responded, “This is a huge victory for not only the NYC pro-life movement but the whole country, because this will thwart the attacks planned in cities across America. The main principle we went on was upholding the First Amendment, and thank God, there are still good judges, even in New York, who see the primary importance of this civil right.”
District Judge William Pauley wrote in his opinion that the NYC rule was “unquestionably a direct limitation on free speech, adding a dig at the pro-abortion ACLU: “Given the New York Civil Liberties Union’s usual concern for First Amendment rights, its amicus brief supporting Defendant’s expansive view of the commercial speech doctrine is puzzling.”
Read more on the decision from the Alliance Defense Fund.
*A similar law attacking Baltimore’s prcs was also overturned, and pro-lifers have just filed a lawsuit to block Austin’s ordinance.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Why don’t CPCs want to post that they don’t provide abortions?
JackBorsch, I think it has more to do with the principle. I’ve seen EMC’s advertisements, and they definitely aren’t pretending to be an abortion business. But if a state or local government can force PRCs to post one kind of sign, what’s to stop them from making them put up other, more objectionable ones in the future? It sets a bad precedent.
Oh, and there’s the whole unconstitutionality thing.
Probably because abortion clinics don’t have to post that they provide no material assistance for pregnant mothers, Jack.
CPCs would be required to list what they do NOT provide on all ads, websites, listings, etc, as well as on their facilities.
They are being told they have to state they do not perform or refer for abortions or dispense birth control.
Forcing a business to post what it does NOT provide could get a tad out of hand. “Sorry, we do not sell Nikes at this Adidas store.”
But personally, I think it would be kinda hilarious to just post on a CPC front door: “We provide free ultrasounds and pregnancy testing, information on fetal development, information on abortion risks and STDs, baby formula, parenting classes, baby and children’s clothing up to size 8, carseats, strollers, cribs, diapers, other baby needs, training on NFP, referrals for adoption and maternity homes, referrals for financial and material assistance, and much more. We are not Planned Parenthood.” :P
Why not require abortion clinics to be required to proclaim what they are ? A Planned Parenthood clinic should say “Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic” or better yet, be required to have a sign that states how many abortions were done there the way McDonalds has how many customers they had. The could say “6,000,000 happy children aborted”. Also, since cigarrette companies are required to show effects of lung cancer, abortion clinic ads should display what an aborted fetus looks like. Hey; Fair is fair.
Ok, I was just wondering.
Lol, that would be great Kel. Then we can have abortion clinics post their services as well. Their sign wouldn’t look so nice.
Jack, they already do that anyway. And the law would require every CPC to have their advertising approved first by a government official. At the foundation of this, there is no real issue of public concern requiring a law to protect anyone; the entire purpose of the law is to help rival abortion clinic businesses stop these centers from convincing women not to use their services. Are CPCs threatening the public interest by providing free pregnancy tests or baby clothes? Meanwhile, abortion clinics get away with using soiled surgical instruments and actually killing women. Nobody ever died from getting a free receiving blanket.
Oh, and there’s the whole unconstitutionality thing.
:D Yeah, that small detail. lol
I agree. A very bad precedent.
Come on, guys.
We don’t help babies AFTER they are born.
PPPPPhhhhhtttttttt
HOOOORAY!
Right, why should CPC’s provide free advertising for abortion clinics, anyway?
What’s so hypocritical about the abortionists is this: they insist that we don’t care about mothers and babies after they are born. Well, they don’t care about women after their abortions are performed. More than one ‘pro-choicer’ has come right onto this blog and said that they were not welcome to express their regret and that counseling was NOT provided by the abortionists.
Yeah, the whole “truth in advertising” thing should be directed at abortion clinics and PP instead. Lose the “family planning” euphemisms and “women’s health clinic” signs and say what’s really going on inside. “Abortion Clinic.” Simple, truthful.
How ’bout it, PP?
I think the concern was that the cpcs are marketing themselves so that girls go there instead of planned parenthood THINKING they are the same.
I thought the intension was to get girls who were seeking abortions to cone into cpcs instead and be talked out of them, that is manipulative.
I also think it has to do with the fact that resource centers aren’t clinics and don’t have doctors on premise (normally) clearly when a woman
believes she is going to see a doctor and instead goes to see volunteers without medical training
that is problematic.
I don’t really understand why pro-lifers
What is it called when PP routinely tells women it’s “just a bunch of cells” or a “clump of tissue” no matter how far along they are?
What is it called when the ultrasound screen(if it’s even used)is turned away from a woman so she can’t see her baby?
Couldn’t be manipulation, coercion or lies of omission could it???
CPC’s are listed in the phone book under Abortion Alternatives. Not too difficult to figure that out.
More and more CPC’s have qualified doctors and/or nurses on staff. Also, many have qualified staff licensed in ultrasound technology.
If a young girl walks into a CPC thinking she is going for an abortion I do believe she could, of her own free will, walk right back out when no abortion if offered.
It drives me nuts when I go to the grocery store for an item or a service and they don’t offer it. Something I would truly expect them to offer, like bananas or a service like renting carpet shampooers.
Shouldn’t there be a law stating that they post everything they don’t sell so that I don’t go in there and get sucked into buying something else?
On the medical side, I just went to the doctor yesterday, for a routine prescription refill. I thought he would also give a cortisone shot to a cyst. He told me he wouldn’t perform that service. Just wait it out.
How dare he? The doctor’s office should have had a sign posted!
I jest of course.
And why shouldn’t CPC’s have to say that they are not medical doctors but volunteers? Why shouldn’t’ they have to say that they don’t provide contraception or abortion referrals?
I mean the Pro-Life side has no problem supporting and requesting that state legislatures make laws requiring the client to hear the fetal heartbeat, to see an ultrasound, to be told that abortion kills a unique human being, that life begins at conception and that there are other options such as a CPC’s and adoption. You people practically make the doctor say an entire script written by you. So why have any problem with the Pro-Abortion side as you call us requesting that you be honest?
“Michael Schmitt says:
July 13, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Why not require abortion clinics to be required to proclaim what they are ? A Planned Parenthood clinic should say “Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic” or better yet, be required to have a sign that states how many abortions were done there the way McDonalds has how many customers they had.”
That’s a generalization, not all Planned Parenthoods provide abortions, the one in my city doesn’t. It just provides family planning services, pregnancy testing, std testing, cancer screenings. So mine wouldn’t have to and besides if you go on the PP website it tells you exactly what services they do and do not provide unlike some of the CPCs.
Ally – how about if all planned parenthood clinics put up a sign that said “We do not give FREE pregnancy tests. We do not give FREE contraceptives. We do not give FREE STD tests. We do not do any cancer screening.”
The point, Ally – is that there is no place in the constitution that states that a business or any enterprise must write out what they do not provide. This is a not about pro-life or pro-abortion – it is about the right of a business to exist without the government telling them what they must and must not put on their advertising.
I guess here is my question do you think cpc’s market themselves in a way that girls beforehand know they do not provide abortions or birth control. Orndo you think cpcs market themselves in a way that they want girls to think they offer abortions and birth contol.
That was a genuine question
Notice I didn’t ask if girls mistook cpcs for clinics…. That doesn’t indiciate anything about the intent of the clinic I asked about the clinics marketing strategy and targeted audience.
When I accused cpcs of manipulating you basically said PP does it too like it’s a defense! Shouldn’t your goal be to not manipulate people regardless of what PP does ( an organization you believe to be evil so why would you take a note out of their book anyway
Lee says:
July 13, 2011 at 5:11 pm
Ally – how about if all planned parenthood clinics put up a sign that said “We do not give FREE pregnancy tests. We do not give FREE contraceptives. We do not give FREE STD tests. We do not do any cancer screening.”
Okay and I agree that would be fair, but keep in mind that if someone calls Planned Parenthoood and asks if those services are free, they’ll tell you it’s on a sliding scale. But CPC’s have been reported to be evasive when asked if they provide abortion or contraceptives so that they can get a woman into their center and convince to do NPF and not have an abortion.
But like I said the Pro-Life side already requires abortion clinics to say certain things like life begins at conception and that abortion kills a unique human being. Pro-Life legislation already requires doctors to show the patient an ultrasound and requires the woman to hear the fetal heartbeat. There are states that make abortion clinics advertise CPC’s and adoption clinics in bold posters and hand out lists of CPCs and Adoption Agencies. Is that unconstitutional? Probably yes, but I don’t hear the Pro-Life side complaining about the informed consent laws for abortion clinics. Therefore, I think it’s fair for CPCs to say that they don’t provide that service and that the people there aren’t doctors.
Shannon,
If you are accusing CPC’s of being manipulative then the burden of proof is on you to prove it. Let’s hear it. Enlighten us.
btw There are quite a few of the regular commenters here that either are directors, volunteers or on the boards of CPC’s.
Ally,
The prolife regs require an abortionist to ASK a woman if she would like to see the ultrasound which she could still refuse to see.
Anyone know HOW in the world that is enforced??
Ally,
A big difference is that an abortion cannot be undone. The woman must have all of the information first before she has the abortion.
A woman can leave a CPC, having used all of its services and still have an abortion.
Once a woman has an abortion and leaves the abortuary, there is no undoing it. To deny that she should have every piece of information available is denying her informed choice.
Ally, the laws that are passed about ultrasounds don’t require the clients to view or hear anything, but allow them to. Normally, abortionists don’t allow their clients see the ultrasounds or hear the fetal or embryonic heartbeat. The laws passed allow the clients the choice to see and hear the ultrasound if they want to.
I don’t know of any laws requiring abortionists to disclose that there are other resources available. The laws requiring abortionists to give information to the clients require them to reveal medically necessary information, such as the possible consequences of abortion, just as is required in the case of any other surgery or medication.
Shannon, as Carla already said, PRCs already advertise as offering abortion alternatives, meaning options that are not abortion. It would be redundant to say they do not offer abortion. It is not manipulative. As others already said, nobody advertises what services they do not offer.
Now we just need a law that says abortion clinics HAVE to list “abortion provider” in their name or title, instead of all this nebulous, cryptic crap like, “Women’s Bright Future Happy Rainbow Healthy Choices Clinic”. Why all the subterfuge in the name, pro-abortionists? Do you really find the “a”-word so unpalatable?
CPCs advertise in the Yellow Pages under “Abortion Alternatives.” This happens to be alphabetically next to the “Abortion” section.
On CPC ads, you will find things like “free pregnancy testing.”
On abortion clinic ads, you will find things like “twilight anesthesia; abortion up to 24 weeks.”
I don’t see how this is misleading or confusing. Some CPC logos even feature mother/child symbols and most have names which include terms like “New Life” or “Living” or “Birth(fill in the blank,” or “Care (fill in the blank) Pregnancy Center.”
A sign stating “we do not do abortions here” is wholly unnecessary. And contrary to popular pro-abortion tripe, no woman is held against her will in a CPC. Women do not enter CPCs and magically become hapless victims any more than they enter abortion clinics and become “empowered.”
Xalisae: Now we just need a law that says abortion clinics HAVE to list “abortion provider” in their name or title, instead of all this nebulous, cryptic crap like, “Women’s Bright Future Happy Rainbow Healthy Choices Clinic”.
ROFL. I know, right? Nope, just ignore those fetal remains in the medical waste bins. This is the “Happy Chippy Chappy Women’s Center.”
LOL
“Raindrops on Roses, Whiskers on Kittens Women’s Day Spalon for Reproductive Justice. This is Carla. How may I direct your call?”
Kel,
I once saw a feminist blog link to a “misleading” pregnancy center. Its phone number was 800-NO-ABORT. Whatever could that mean?
Yes, we’re really trying to trick women.
Carla! :D lol
“Will that be Visa or Mastercard today? Or do you have a RRWKWDSRJ charge? Sign up today and get 10% off your first ‘surgical empowerment.'”
Oh, I needed this, Kel.
Thanks. :)
Hooray! Great news!!!
And this thread is hilarious! LOL! :))
“If you are accusing CPC’s of being manipulative then the burden of proof is on you to prove it. Let’s hear it. Enlighten us.”
Going by the standard of proof that is popularly accepted around here, that would be pretty easy. Just call up or visit hundreds of CPC’s around the country, get about half a dozen to do or say something seemingly manipulative or otherwise unethical (selective editing of illegally-recorded conversations would be an acceptable tool for use to this end), and then smear them all on the basis of the actions of the few crooked ones. Sound familiar?
If that’s so easy, Jane, why hasn’t it been done yet? lol
The documentary, “12th and Delaware.” provided a close look at the shameless manipulation done by a CPC in Florida.
“selective editing of illegally-recorded conversations would be an acceptable tool for use to this end”
Like Lila Rose’s ”Live Action” videos?
Go for it, Joan!!!
Someone who is proabortion really needs to go undercover and get the manipulation on video!!
We’ll wait.
You are cordially invited to my center of course.
CC,
There are more than 4,000 Pregnancy Centers in the US. That doesn’t include maternity homes.
Got anything else?
Sitcom material!
Gee…what happened to “trust women”? Pro-aborts don’t “trust women” to think they’re smart enough to know what a CPC is????
“12th and Delaware” as evidence that the CPCs deceive? Perhaps this so-called documentary intended to imply they do. However, a user, of the services provided at both the abortion center and the pregnancy center at 12th and Delaware, posted this comment on YouTube trailer for 12th and Delaware, “this really hits close to home for me because i have had an abortion at 12th and delaware and I have also gone across the street to pregnancy care center when I carried out my last pregnancy where I had my pregnancy test and first ultrasound. I believe that if I had gone to pregnancy care center first that I would have never had the abortion at 17″
What do you suppose this young woman meant?
Did she mean that the pregnancy center would have “brainwashed” her?
Or did she mean that she would have made a different choice if she had found “real help” at the abortion center?
PS. I enjoyed the descriptive names for the abortion centers. We have Womancare, Women’s Advisory Center, Women’s Center, Northland Family Planning and of course, Planned Parenthood (which does not help anyone plan for parenthood) – all abortion providers. Then we have Carenet, Crossroads Pregnancy Center, Birth Choice, Women and Teens Pregnancy Center and Problem Pregnancy Center – all pregnancy resource centers.
As the director of a pregnancy center (and have been for 17 years), I am so glad this judge stepped in. The law would be like forcing Taco Bell to post a sign that says “We don’t serve hamburgers.” Or an attorney who does adoption law to post a sign that says “I don’t do divorce law.” It’s just wrong.
When reading some of the threads above, I just had to make some comments…
1. Many Planned Parenthood locations do NOT have a doctor on site at all times. They may have a nurse on-site somewhere, but often times another staff person (not medical) will perform a pregnancy test or other “medical” service. My assistant used to work there. SO to indicate that every medical clinic location must have a doctor on-site to be called a “clinic” would change the operations of many organizations.
2. Every pregnancy center I know has in their phone script “We do not perform nor refer for abortions” immediately when a woman calls to enquire about services. Thus – why the need to state AGAIN what we already say?
3. Pregnancy centers who perform ultrasounds ARE MEDICAL CLINICS, operating under the direction of a LICENSED PHYSICIAN. So – for those who say we are not clinics. Try again.
4. And the statement that abortion clinics are being forced by someone to say “Life begins at conception”??? Really? Name one place. That would be AWESOME!
Robin, thank you for the work you’re doing!
2. Every pregnancy center I know has in their phone script “We do not perform nor refer for abortions” immediately when a woman calls to enquire about services. Thus – why the need to state AGAIN what we already say?
Yeah, at my old CPC we had people call and ask “Do you do or refer for abortions?” The answer was always “No. We offer information on abortion procedures and risks, as well as information on fetal development, and free pregnancy testing. Would you care to make an appointment?” 99% of the time, they made the appointment.
Joan beat me to it. If there is so much evidence of manipulation, find it, make the videos/recordings, do the work. No one is going to take your word that if the work had been done it would have shown deception. Seriously guys, pinky swear – it is super hard to tell that they don’t do abortions.
On the other hand, I recently went to Taco Bell. It was RIGHT next to a burger king so even though the sign said, “think outside the bun” I was just sure I could get a burger there. I went in and they tried to convince me to eat something called a “fajita.” I had to walk out the door and ALL THE WAY across the street to get my burger. I could have used the NYC council here.
So i just watched 12 and Delaware.
I thought the director of the CPC was so very sincere in her cause. But they cited in the movie that they purposely were across from an abortion clinic to capture some of their cliental. They said when asked if they perform abortion they tried to get women into the clinic and didnt tell them outright that no abortions were performed.
The director bought a woman food to buy her time counseling. She said she purposefully tries to delay the ultrasound apt as long as necessary and keep her coming back so that the baby shows up bigger. You say other centers dont do that and I believe you. But honestly do you not find that manipulative. If a PP official bought a hungry woman lunch so she could tell her how awful parenthood was, would that seem manipulative to you?
Side note what is with the big guy who stalks the abortion doctor. He is very scary.
How is this for manipulation: A mother calls ahead for an appointment for her daughter. Her daughter is pregnant, and she requests an ultrasound. Planned parenthood happily complies, makes an appointment for the daughter to have an ultrasound.
Unbeknownst to the grandmother, Planned Parenthood here stopped doing pre-natal care. The only ultrasounds done are usually on women having abortions. But they have her come in anyway.
The day of the appointment, the mom brings her daughter in, again asking for an ultrasound. No problem, they say. Until the mother reads the full-disclosure paper, outlining the possible side effects as: bleeding, infertility, infection and the like. The mother looks up in horror, to realize they were trying to trick her into signing a paper to have her underage daughter have an abortion – and those were the possible side-effects. That woman quickly got her daughter out of the Planned Parenthood, and came right over to us, exclaiming: “Not to my Grandbaby!! – You won’t believe what they tried to do!”
To say that she was irate, would be an understatement.
So who was conning whom? PP was trying their best to pull a fast one, to have an underage girl have an abortion, despite what they came there for: pregnancy care.
Now, I would call that manipulation, of the first order.
I’m sure that there are people on both sides have used under-handed tactics. Everyone is human. The difference is that if an abortion provider uses trickery, what could and often does result is a dead child and damaged woman. There is no way for a duped teenager to bring her child back if she realizes that she didn’t get all the information. Not that I think that it is okay to fool people, but the people on the pro-life side are not dealing in death, they are trying to prevent it.
“The director bought a woman food to buy her time counseling. She said she purposefully tries to delay the ultrasound apt as long as necessary and keep her coming back so that the baby shows up bigger. You say other centers dont do that and I believe you. But honestly do you not find that manipulative. If a PP official bought a hungry woman lunch so she could tell her how awful parenthood was, would that seem manipulative to you?”
Yeah, that’s a bit manipulative. I agree. A PP official doing the same thing would be a lot more morally worse, in my opinion. If an abortion is performed on someone who was tricked or convinced into it, it’s irrevocable. There isn’t any way for her to go back and change her mind. If someone is convinced to keep a pregnancy, she can still change her mind and have an abortion if she really wants to (much as we might dislike it, it is legal still), adopt the child out, or use Safe Haven laws. She still has options regarding her child. Abortion ends the options.
Your point about purposefully drawing clientele I don’t get. CPCs provide care to women who want to keep their babies that they definitely won’t get at a clinic. If some teenager feels desperate and is going in for an abortion, wouldn’t you want her to know that there are people that will help her out if she wants to continue her pregnancy? How is it real choice if someone doesn’t know that there are help and resources if she wants to have her child?
And yeah, the stalker protester guy was a creep. He made me cringe, honestly.
joyfromillinois , what is your point exactly. PP is manipulative lets do it too? Don’t you think PP is like the most evil organization on earth, why would you want to mirror their behavior. Manipulating people into getting an abortion is wrong. Manipulating people into not getting an abortion is wrong. Can we please just say NO to manipulation. I do not defend anyone doing it.
If some teenager feels desperate and is going in for an abortion, wouldn’t you want her to know that there are people that will help her out if she wants to continue her pregnancy?
Frankly i dont think getting counseled from anyone who works at a clinic or a cpc is a good idea, too much bias from both. The problem I see with a girl ending up at a cpc when she didnt intend to is all about manipulation. One of the girls said she wanted to terminate and tried to lift heavy things and drink vinegar to miscarry. She said she would have aborted if the cpc hasnt told her she could die from an abortion.
This girl was diserviced by going to a cpc first. Statistically This girl has a much larger chance from dying in childbirth than from abortion. She was lied to and wronged.
“Frankly i dont think getting counseled from anyone who works at a clinic or a cpc is a good idea, too much bias from both. The problem I see with a girl ending up at a cpc when she didnt intend to is all about manipulation. One of the girls said she wanted to terminate and tried to lift heavy things and drink vinegar to miscarry. She said she would have aborted if the cpc hasnt told her she could die from an abortion.
This girl was diserviced by going to a cpc first. Statistically This girl has a much larger chance from dying in childbirth than from abortion. She was lied to and wronged.”
You can die from abortion, just like any medical procedure. I don’t know the statistics compared to childbirth, do you have a link? Also, I think that girl you are talking about was also worried about future infertility, but it’s also been a while since I have seen the movie. Infertility can result from abortion, that isn’t a falsehood.
I don’t agree with the manipulation, at all. I can understand the impulse better from the pro-life side, but it still doesn’t make it okay. What would be your solution for a girl to find non-biased counseling, if you think clinics and CPCs (I definitely agree about clinics being manipulative, I doubt that the majority of CPCs are) are both unreliable?
I know that the public school system in this country is lacking in many areas, but what part of abortion ALTERNATIVES don’t people understand?
Shannon, if a woman is so unsure that upon seeing her developing baby she is swayed, then far from being manipulative, that CPC has prevented her from making the biggest irrevocable decision of her life. If she sees the pictures of fetal development and feels that she still wants an abortion, she can WALK OUT THE DOOR. Oh, but she might have spent an hour or two eating free lunch. The horror.
Of COURSE CPC’s are trying to “take PP’s clientele”. They are trying to show women a different way. To show them that there is help available. To help them make the other “choice” (you know the one that pro-choice people claim to be absolutely indifferent to a woman choosing b/c it’s not about abortion (GOD FORBID you suggest they actually support abortion)). CPC’s have the constitutionally protected right to bring up the topic of abortion in the way they wish, not have their speech mandated by the government.
Bravo, Bravo. The City Council tried to put into place a law that mandated signage and other items that NO NON-PROFIT or For Profit Business has ever had placed on ti. Bravo to the Judge. I sat through the city council hearings and vote and the members of the city council were so biased and in bed with NARAL and others it was (unfortunately) NOT shocking. They literally used NARAL to put this law together and most of the city council members at the hearing didn’t even stay to hear anything from concerned Doctors, Professionals and residents of NYC. At one point they even said a pregnancy support center title like “Sisters of Life” (an order of Nuns) and “Bridge to Life” had deceptive titles about where they stood on LIFE issues. Colleen E. Barry, Manhattan Business Owner