By: Melinda Delahoyde
Two days after President Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States, the nation commemorated the 36th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. As expected, the new President, seeking not to be too divisive too soon, spoke in moderated tones and employed rhetoric about “reducing” or “reducing the need for” abortion.
So, taking President Obama at his word that he truly wants to see this devastating procedure chosen less frequently, what policies and ideas should he promote to accomplish that goal?
As you can imagine, there are a host of voices on this topic. Abortion rights advocates generally want more funding for contraception and sex education. Pro-life activist groups call for funding abstinence education, promoting adoption, and protecting legislative restrictions, such as informed consent and waiting periods. Other groups want more support for anti-poverty programs.
These voices will debate over which policy is best, but there is another voice not being heard – mainly because those championing it are too busy actually reducing abortion! In 2008, news headlines pointed to a 25% decrease in abortions from 1.6 million in 1990 to 1.2 million in 2005. Commentators asked why this might be happening, and some pointed to the growth and effectiveness of the nation’s more than 2,300 pregnancy centers. With statistics showing fewer pregnancies ending in abortion than in years past, TIME magazine said, “That would seem to be evidence that the quiet campaign for women’s hearts and minds, conducted in thousands of crisis pregnancy centers around the country, on billboards, phone banks and websites, is having an effect.”
So, if you missed TIME’s cover story in 2006, pregnancy centers are known as the “compassion wing of the pro-life movement,” and they work. After receiving the help of a pregnancy center, nine out of ten women served are empowered to carry their pregnancy to term, according to statistics gathered by Care Net, a network of 1,160 centers. The secret of their success is the compassionate, nonjudgmental support of volunteers who serve as mentors to women facing unplanned pregnancies – walking with them every step of the way. 30,000 such volunteers serve in Care Net pregnancy centers alone. Like the Salvation Army and Habitat for Humanity, pregnancy centers embody the great American tradition of volunteerism and care for the weak and forgotten ones in our society.
Their effectiveness also stems from the fact that they are deeply rooted in the local community and well-connected in partnerships with a host of agencies caring for women and children. By working together to provide education, emotional support, and practical help to pregnant women in crisis, pregnancy centers and their community partners help moms welcome their children into a more stable and healthy environment. This in turn has a positive impact on extended families and the entire community.
Another feather in the proverbial pregnancy center “cap” is their financial independence. In order to keep the lights on as well as offer a wide variety of free services – from parenting classes and baby cribs to ultrasounds and STD testing, pregnancy centers rely almost entirely on private donations from local individuals who simply want to do something to help a neighbor in need (rather than expect Uncle Sam to do it).
So, with this notable background in mind, Care Net and our national network of pregnancy centers are after one thing from the new administration and Congress (and it’s not funding).
We’re simply asking for this, that those leading the “abortion reduction” discussion merely acknowledge the contribution of pregnancy centers in helping to achieve this goal and promote a national environment that allows us to do what we do best – help women in need in our local communities.
Respecting the work of pregnancy centers may be “out-of-the box” thinking for an Obama administration, though it would be consistent with the bridge-building promises he made during his campaign. Though obliged to the abortion advocates who helped elect him, the new President should simply listen to the stories of women who were helped by a local pregnancy center and decided against abortion. Instead of rushing to judgment about who we are, let the women speak! By better understanding the work that we do, the President and those engaged in the abortion-reduction discussion will recognize, like TIME magazine, that our community based, volunteer-led work “is having an effect.”
Melinda Delahoyde is president of Care Net, a national network of 1,160 pregnancy centers across North America.
Reprinted with permission by Care Net: www.care-net.org
Two days after President Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States, the nation commemorated the 36th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. As expected, the new President, seeking not to be too divisive too soon, spoke in moderated tones and employed rhetoric about “reducing” or “reducing the need for” abortion.So, taking President Obama at his word that he truly wants to see this devastating procedure chosen less frequently, what policies and ideas should he promote to accomplish that goal?
As you can imagine, there are a host of voices on this topic. Abortion rights advocates generally want more funding for contraception and sex education. Pro-life activist groups call for funding abstinence education, promoting adoption, and protecting legislative restrictions, such as informed consent and waiting periods. Other groups want more support for anti-poverty programs.
These voices will debate over which policy is best, but there is another voice not being heard – mainly because those championing it are too busy actually reducing abortion! In 2008, news headlines pointed to a 25% decrease in abortions from 1.6 million in 1990 to 1.2 million in 2005. Commentators asked why this might be happening, and some pointed to the growth and effectiveness of the nation’s more than 2,300 pregnancy centers. With statistics showing fewer pregnancies ending in abortion than in years past, TIME magazine said, “That would seem to be evidence that the quiet campaign for women’s hearts and minds, conducted in thousands of crisis pregnancy centers around the country, on billboards, phone banks and websites, is having an effect.”
So, if you missed TIME’s cover story in 2006, pregnancy centers are known as the “compassion wing of the pro-life movement,” and they work. After receiving the help of a pregnancy center, nine out of ten women served are empowered to carry their pregnancy to term, according to statistics gathered by Care Net, a network of 1,160 centers. The secret of their success is the compassionate, nonjudgmental support of volunteers who serve as mentors to women facing unplanned pregnancies – walking with them every step of the way. 30,000 such volunteers serve in Care Net pregnancy centers alone. Like the Salvation Army and Habitat for Humanity, pregnancy centers embody the great American tradition of volunteerism and care for the weak and forgotten ones in our society.
Their effectiveness also stems from the fact that they are deeply rooted in the local community and well-connected in partnerships with a host of agencies caring for women and children. By working together to provide education, emotional support, and practical help to pregnant women in crisis, pregnancy centers and their community partners help moms welcome their children into a more stable and healthy environment. This in turn has a positive impact on extended families and the entire community.
Another feather in the proverbial pregnancy center “cap” is their financial independence. In order to keep the lights on as well as offer a wide variety of free services – from parenting classes and baby cribs to ultrasounds and STD testing, pregnancy centers rely almost entirely on private donations from local individuals who simply want to do something to help a neighbor in need (rather than expect Uncle Sam to do it).
So, with this notable background in mind, Care Net and our national network of pregnancy centers are after one thing from the new administration and Congress (and it’s not funding).
We’re simply asking for this, that those leading the “abortion reduction” discussion merely acknowledge the contribution of pregnancy centers in helping to achieve this goal and promote a national environment that allows us to do what we do best – help women in need in our local communities.
Respecting the work of pregnancy centers may be “out-of-the box” thinking for an Obama administration, though it would be consistent with the bridge-building promises he made during his campaign. Though obliged to the abortion advocates who helped elect him, the new President should simply listen to the stories of women who were helped by a local pregnancy center and decided against abortion. Instead of rushing to judgment about who we are, let the women speak! By better understanding the work that we do, the President and those engaged in the abortion-reduction discussion will recognize, like TIME magazine, that our community based, volunteer-led work “is having an effect.”
Melinda Delahoyde is president of Care Net, a national network of 1,160 pregnancy centers across North America.
Reprinted with permission by Care Net: www.care-net.org
