Susan G. Komen and the Race to Erase A Mistake

Drake Carr February 15, 2012.    

      Near the beginning of this month, the widely respected Susan G. Komen Foundation decided to cut off its funding to Planned Parenthood (washingtonpost.com, 2012). Komen, arguably the most well-known breast cancer organization in the world, is known for putting its focus upon women's health. The decision to defund Planned Parenthood, however, suggests that the foundation is placing too much importance on politics. Komen has since “reversed its decision” (politico.com, 2012), and the group is struggling to regain its once golden reputation.

     The decision to defund Planned Parenthood was the result of several factors. One possible reason for the decision may lay in the fact that a newly hired, vice-president Karen Handel had previously (unsuccessfully) run for governor of Georgia, and she had worked to end Planned Parenthood's funding (webarchive.org, 2010). Another factor in this process may have been the Americans United for Life President Charmaine Yoest. “It’s her group that issued a report last fall, 'The Case for Investigating Planned Parenthood,' that led to a probe by the Energy and Commerce Committee. And it’s that investigation that puts Planned Parenthood in violation of Komen’s new policy that bars funding of groups under investigation” (washingtonpost.com, 2012). The Komen Foundation had anti-Planned Parenthood members, but it had its fair share of supporters as well. According to another article this year by the Washington Post, during multiple subcommittee meetings discussing the possible outcomes of defunding Planned Parenthood, the consensus was consistently that cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood would have dire consequences. The Komen board overrode the two subcommittees. “The consensus of the board subcommittee was to keep the funding,” said an employee (washingtonpost.com, 2012).

     Besides political reasoning against the funding, some claim that Komen ought to shun Planned Parenthood for health or medical reasons. A 2011 study claimed that there was a link between abortion and breast cancer, implying that a woman who undergoes an abortion is placed at a slightly higher risk for being diagnosed with breast cancer (tandfonline.com, 2011). However, this argument is easily refuted. This type of research is shaky, and has very little backing to it. The American Cancer Society states that, “at this time, the scientific evidence does not support the notion that abortion of any kind raises the risk of breast cancer or any other type of cancer” (cancer.org, 2011). There is simply not enough evidence to attempt cloak this political action with a medical reasoning.

     The public's reaction to the defunding has been immediate, and it has shown that the foundation's once respected reputation is now not so pristine. Not only has Komen lost supporters among it's Pro-Choice followers, it is now also struggling to maintain the devotion of its right-wing, Pro-Life followers. According to Politico, “not many people knew that it funded Planned Parenthood until it decided to stop” (politico.com, 2012). Those who are anti-abortion may now speak out against Komen for affiliating itself once again with Planned Parenthood. The backlash has already begun; Jeanne Monahan of the Family Research Council said, “It would be heartbreaking for women who suffer from breast cancer if Planned Parenthood has bullied Komen into loosening their higher standards,” (politico.com, 2012). Now Komen must proceed with a careful balancing act as it attempts to regain the trust of both parties.

     While the reasons are fairly obvious for right-wing conservatives and Pro-Life activists speaking out against Planned Parenthood, it may not be quite as well-known why so many support Komen's funding to the organization. When people think of Planned Parenthood, abortion and birth control are generally the immediate things that come to mind. It is essential to realize, however, that the organization does much more than simply providing these services. “STD awareness, body image issues, gender and sexuality questions, cancer screenings and general health and well-being questions are all addressed by Planned Parenthood's staff and programs” (nyunews.com, 2011). It is not an organization devoted to performing as many abortions as possible. Rather, Planned Parenthood is focused upon the health of all individuals, not only women. Men can receive cancer screenings and other procedures as well. Follow the link (here: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/men-4285.htm) to read through the various health services provided. Many oppose the funding to Planned Parenthood simply because they are not aware of the many services the organization offers, many of which are completely un-related to abortion or contraception.

     The Susan G. Komen Foundation has long been regarded as an entity focused solely on health and well-being issues. It is not a foundation designed to conform to political ideologies. Komen's decision to withdraw its funding to Planned Parenthood was an obvious mistake. It immediately garnered negative responses from the many supporters of Pro-Choice and Planned Parenthood. Consequently, with its decision to return to its funding, Komen then received negative feedback from Pro-Life individuals and groups, many of whom were never even aware of the funding in the first place. The entire ordeal has become a fiasco, putting Komen in a position that has no perfect answer. The lesson learned in this process has proven to be that organizations focused on the well-being of others ought to focus on the well-being of others, and nothing else.

REFERENCES

Feder, J. L. "Can Susan G. Komen Recover from Planned Parenthood Funding Fiasco? - J. Lester Feder - POLITICO.com." Politics, Political News - Election 2012 - POLITICO.com. 2 Feb. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72435.html>.

Handel, Karen. "Internet Archive Wayback Machine." Internet Archive: Wayback Machine. 15 July 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://web.archive.org/web/20100921093610/http:/blog.karenhandel.com/2010/07/karen-handel-on-life-and-planned-parenthood/>.

"Influence of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 and Prolonged Estrogen Exposure on Risk of Breast Cancer Among Women in Armenia." Tandfonline.com. Taylor and Francis, 6 Oct. 2011. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07399332.2011.569041>.

"Is Abortion Linked to Breast Cancer?" American Cancer Society :: Information and Resources for Cancer: Breast, Colon, Prostate, Lung and Other Forms. American Cancer Society, 20 Sept. 2011. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/BreastCancer/MoreInformation/is-abortion-linked-to-breast-cancer>.

Kliff, Sarah. "How Komen Decided to Defund Planned Parenthood - The Washington Post." Washington Post: Breaking News, World, US, DC News & Analysis. Washington Post, 8 Feb. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/how-komen-decided-to-defund-planned-parenthood/2012/02/08/gIQAgIntyQ_blog.html>.

"Men's Sexual Health." Sexual & Reproductive Health - Sex Education - Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/men-4285.htm>.

ROBERTS/REUTERS, JOSHUA. "Susan G. Komen Planned Parenthood Funding Decision Sparks Donation Spike, Strong Reactions - The Washington Post." Washington Post: Breaking News, World, US, DC News & Analysis. Washington Post, 2 Feb. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/susan-g-komen-planned-parenthood-funding-decision-sparks-donation-spike-strong-reactions/2012/02/02/gIQAPLqokQ_story.html>.

Whiting, Karissa. "Benefits of Planned Parenthood Overlooked | NYU's Daily Student Newspaper." Home | NYU's Daily Student Newspaper. New York University, 7 Mar. 2011. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://nyunews.com/opinion/2011/03/07/08whiting/>.