Planned Parenthood Kills 40% of All Babies Who Die in Abortions
Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report “Above & Beyond” for 2022-2023 is of special interest because it is the first by the abortion giant officially covering the time since the June 2022 overturn of Roe. As such, it gives people an idea as to how much business was and was not affected by the Dobbs decision overturning Roe and what steps the group has taken to keep the nation’s largest abortion chain open and busy.
In the report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) says that its affiliates performed 392,715 abortions in the service year running October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022. The report shows there had been no overall dropoff at its clinics since the 374,155 the group reported in its previous report.
Nailing down just how many abortions there have been nationally since Dobbs is a difficult enterprise, but if recent reports from Guttmacher turn out to be accurate, this means that Planned Parenthood clinics are now responsible for something like four out of every 10 abortions performed in the U.S.
With not just prenatal care and adoption referrals, but staples such as cancer screenings and even contraception at or near ten or twenty year lows, one might be tempted to think that Planned Parenthood was financially suffering. But revenues at PPFA reached an all-time high of more than two billion ($2,054,300,000.000)! And given that revenues outpaced expenses by more than $178 million, it is clear that the organization has money to burn.
Please follow LifeNews on Rumble for the latest pro-life videos.
All About Abortion
From the opening “Message from Leadership” PPFA’s president Alexis McGill Johnson and Board Chair Tanujah Bahal make their fixation on abortion clear. Placing their comments in the context of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision, the two say that their “health centers” have been through “the most trying of times.”
Yet their clinics kept their doors open, welcoming patients from “down the street” and “from two, or three, or five states over.”
Later, the report details how that with more than 20 states “banning” some or all abortions, the staff was “moving mountains” by “finding appointments in other states and the resources to get patients there,” and “building as much capacity as possible for abortion appointments.”
The travel of abortion patients from pro-life to pro-abortion states was not an organic groundswell of suddenly desperate women but an orchestrated result. Planned Parenthood proudly admits that “In the year after the decision, 90 patient navigators across 41 Planned Parenthood affiliates helped more than 33,000 people get the transportation and travel support, financial assistance, and referrals they needed to get abortion care.”
Money was a big part of the increase in abortions seen at Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics post-Dobbs. PPFA says that the organization “expanded direct financial support to help patients cover the expenses of abortion care and travel.” They don’t say how much money they gave, but the group says, “More than 15,000 people received assistance to help cover travel costs,” and “More than 50,000 people received support to cover the costs of their abortion.”
In other words, many pregnant women on the fence about abortion, perhaps being held back by the costs or logistics, opted for abortion after receiving an offer of subsidized (or free) travel and medical care from Planned Parenthood.
Abortion behind many other activities
Covering all their bases, Planned Parenthood wishes people to know how broadly they advertise and promote their abortion services. They note that 863,000 visited its special abortionfinder.org
PPFA also notes that 49 of its affiliates offer “telehealth” services, and that they had 123,855 telehealth appointments in 2022. It is not specified here, but many abortion groups began setting up remote sales and delivery of abortion pills by telemedicine in 2021 after the Biden administration signaled its support for the practice.
Planned Parenthood wants people to know that they did not simply accept the High Court’s decision in Dobbs and give states the ability to determine their organization’s destiny. PPFA says that their lawyers have 30 open cases in the courts challenging abortion limits in 16 states and federal policies put in place by previous pro-life administrations. Altogether, Planned Parenthood says they and their coalition partners had filed suits about “bans” in 20 states.
They admit they were not successful in every state, but PPFA says that even where restrictions were ultimately upheld, “the delay Planned Parenthood fought for meant that more people could get the care they needed when they needed it.”
Working in social media, PPFA launched a national campaign to “destigmatize” abortion, getting women to tell their stories about their abortions. Also, when many states instituted protections for unborn, Planned Parenthood did a “Patient Reassurance Campaign” in English and Spanish for anyone confused about where they could go for (abortion) care.
More about the Money
Just over half of PPFA’s two billion dollars in revenue went toward expenses for “medical services” ($1.1445 billion) like abortion, contraception, cancer screenings. Planned Parenthood doesn’t detail how much money came from each, but abortion is one of the group’s pricier services.
To get some idea of its economic impact, though, costs at Planned Parenthood South Atlantic range from around $500 for an early chemical abortion to $2300 for a later surgical abortion. At a minimum, this leads us to believe that abortion brings in at least $196 million, though a figure at least twice that is not out of the question.
Planned Parenthood has not been above using the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs to boost giving. Revenues from “Private Contributions and Bequests” reached what is believed to be an all-time high of $997.5 million.
How much of this money went towards the subsidized or free abortions or abortion travel that we talked about earlier is unknown, but this sort of strategic giving helped keep abortions and revenues high at Planned Parenthood during what were supposed to be the organization’s darkest hours.
Of course, the government continued to be a big source of money for Planned Parenthood, responsible for about 34% of the group’s revenues. Given that $699.3 million in ‘Government Health Services Reimbursements & Grants” represented a new record in taxpayer support, it is perhaps surprising that there weren’t more abortions, with so many of these women traveling from states where unborn children are protected to states where abortions are actually funded by the state.
That huge amount of government money is significant. It is probably one of the reasons that Planned Parenthood spends $46.7 million in “Public Policy” and $113 million in “Advocacy” to protect the human destruction that is essential to their bottom line.
Increasing abortion is the bottom line
There is only oblique reference to it, but Planned Parenthood and its affiliates have been doing a lot to try to keep their abortion business busy.
Employees in states with protections for the unborn have turned into travel agents shepherding people to Planned Parenthood clinics in neighboring states. Affiliates in those abortion friendly states have beefed up staff, expanded facilities, added mobile abortion clinics to handle overflow.
Where they can, many Planned Parenthood clinics have added chemical abortions by telemedicine, so that patients do not even need to come into the clinic to get their abortion pills. So far, we don’t believe these clinics are selling or shipping those pills to women in pro-life states, but court and administrative rulings may change that in the future.
While PPFA may not have seemed to have been as active on the national scene, they have clearly been active at the state level. They fought any pro-life laws and moved as many patients as possible to states where they have strong affiliates and high capacity mega-clinics.
Planned Parenthood has long been the biggest, most powerful, and most deadly abortion promoter and provider in the U.S. Now, even with Roe in the rear view window, PPFA is poised to go “Above & Beyond” whatever horrible things they’ve done in the past.
LifeNews.com Note: Randall O’Bannon, Ph.D., is the director of education and research for theNational Right to Life Committee. This column originally appeared at NRL News Today.ADVERTISEMENT
Gene, your complete and utter failure to take any significant action against The British Pregnancy Advisory Service speaks volumes about your hypocrisy on the matter of birth control.
ReplyDeleteBut then, what can we expect from a man who bangs on about his devotion to Roman Catholicism who at the same time used artificial contraception to limit his family to three children. Not for nothing was Gene’s nickname in the staff room at Douay Martyrs Bobby “Fetherlite” Kennedy.
And, lest we forget, the repulsive hypocrisy of some practitioners of the Catholic faith - people like Gene "Fetherlite" Vincent - was also seen in action at St Joseph's Church, Penole, in California in 1985. And what an example it set to the rest of the world...
ReplyDeleteHad Ratzinger unfrocked Kiesle in 1985, the abuse of children at St Joseph's would not have continued for a further three years. That is a FACT, no matter how often you try to deny it.
Ratzinger's apology in full reads as follows [my footnotes}:
“I can only express to all the victims [1] of sexual abuse my profound shame, my deep sorrow and my heartfelt request for forgiveness. I have had great responsibilities [2] in the Catholic Church. All the greater is my pain for the abuses [3] and the errors [4] hat occurred in those different places [5] during the time of my mandate."[6]
1 ALL THE VICTIMS, Gene: victimS, plural: you can tell this by the S on the end of the word. All the victims of sexual abuse that occurred during Ratzingers time as Archbishop of Munich [1977- 1982] and later head of the Congregation of the Faith and Pope - that is, 1985 - 2013. The phrase "ALL THE VICTIMS therefore must include the victims of Stephen Kiesle between the years 1985-1988, when Ratzinger failed to unfrock Kiesle. [2] I HAVE HAD GREAT RESPONSIBILITES [see 1 above]: and one of those was to detect, root out and expel priests and others in the Catholic Church whose favourite hobby was buggering small boys and raping little girls. These GREAT RESPONSIBILITIES obviously include those children abused by Stephen Kiesle after Ratzinger failed to unfrock him in 1985. [3] THE ABUSES - these must include the abuses committed by Stephen Kiesle after Ratzinger failed to unfrock him [unless you can prove differently, Gene?].
[4] THE ERRORS - these must include Ratzinger's failure to unfrock Kiesle in 1985 and probably his failure to alert Fr Thomas Ryan that he was allowing a convicted paedophile rapist to minister to the young people in his church.
[5] THOSE DIFFERENT PLACES - except, of course at St Joseph's Church, Penole, CA, where Stephen Kiesle, still a priest, continued to abuse children during the years 1985-1988 - Ratzinger made it clear that his apology did not include this, didn't he, Gene, and you can prove that, can't you? What's that? oh, you can't? Dear me, and YOU call ME a lying tosser... [5] DURING MY MANDATE: that is, during the years 1985 - 2013.
It is clear to anyone whose mind has a greater ratiocinatory capacity than a pair of skid-marked underpants that Ratzinger was apologising for all the sexual abuse committed on his watch 1985-2013 by priests whom he failed either properly to oversee, accurately to diagnose and condignly to punish, as well as arranging for their being unable to access children and young people ever again.
"I can only express to ALL the victims of sexual abuse my profound shame, my deep sorrow and my heartfelt request for forgiveness." It's that word ALL that gives it away, Gene: I'm sorry if it's confusing. Stuff your pissy little opinions up your arse. I will not apologise for telling the truth, and I will go on telling it until you acknowledge that it is the truth. In the meantime, I continue to wait for your answer to this:
"Detters can we leave A.N. WILSON and ARIANNA HUFFINGTON behind?"
Not until you have dealt honestly with this example of your lying bastardy:
'Gene writes beautifully - something not always the case with authors of trail-blazing literary works.' [A.N. WILSON]
"The genius of James Joyce is alive and well and living amongst us. His name is Gene Vincent." [A.N. WILSON]
'I was enthralled. A new star has shot into the literary firmament. [ARIANNA HUFFINGTON]
When you are going to admit that you have made these reviews and their authors up? Make no mistake: I am going to keep on asking until you tell the truth, or I lose patience, inform Mr Wilson and Ms Huffington and let nature take its course.
"Gene, your complete and utter failure to take any significant action against The British Pregnancy Advisory Service speaks volumes about your hypocrisy on the matter of birth control."
ReplyDeleteYes, I have taken very significant action against this pernicious organisation and this includes picketing abortion mills.
I also have, as you well know, given the BPAS hell on this very forum.
Unlike you who failed totally to make the slightest effort to denounce the Left's endorsement of the evil Paedophile Information Exchange.
GENE
"Yes, I have taken very significant action against this pernicious organisation and this includes picketing abortion mills."
ReplyDeleteNo, you haven't, you lying sod - you are too much of a coward ever to do anything as positive as that. Not to mention that such picketing involves the public harassment and belittling distressed pregnant women - which, if you'd ever have actually got off your arse to do it, would be in keeping with your lazy, nasty, vicious bigotry.
"I also have, as you well know, given the BPAS hell on this very forum."
Big deal: who reads this apology for a blog? and if anyone does apart from me, who takes a blind bit of notice. And what kind of a wanker boasts about attacked organisations from behind a pseudonym on an anonymous blog?
"Unlike you who failed totally to make the slightest effort to denounce the Left's endorsement of the evil Paedophile Information Exchange."
No, Gene, repeating a nasty smear doesn't make it any truer, you silly little man.
[1] "The Left" does not exist - it is simply your lazily conflated bogeyman, with no more substance than the "gay lobby" or "the TES Opinion Clique";
[2] Neither the Parliamentary nor the National Labour Party endorsed the Paedophile Information Exchange;
[3[ Several individuals - who spoke only for themselves and who were active members of the Labour Party - were members of the NCCL at a time when the PIE was affliliated to it. That is the total substance of "The Left's" "endorsement" of the PIE.
In other words your accusation is a scurrilous lie you put out to try to elide your humiliation over the Ratzinger/Keisle nonsense.
On the other hand, your total failure, repeated over many years, to respond to the observation below does really expose you as a stinking hypocrite and a bogus Catholic:
"Gene, your complete and utter failure to take any significant action against The British Pregnancy Advisory Service speaks volumes about your hypocrisy on the matter of birth control. But then, what can we expect from a man who bangs on about his devotion to Roman Catholicism who at the same time used artificial contraception to limit his family to three children. Not for nothing was Gene’s nickname in the staff room at Douay Martyrs Bobby “Fetherlite” Kennedy."
Game, set and match, you two faced weasel.
"The Left" does not exist"
ReplyDeleteWho are you trying to fool? The Left most certainly exists.
And, the PIE was affiliated for almost ten years to the NCCL. And the NCCL was pinko/liberal Left par excellence.
GENE
"The Left" does not exist as a coherent, organised body with a unified set of principles, and your saying over and over again that it does will not make it so.
Delete"And the NCCL was pinko/liberal Left par excellence."
And you can of course prove that by listing all its members and their proven political affiliations? Of course you can't, you simpleton.
It's getting to the stage that you are almost insulting your own intelligence, paltry as it is.
Detterling you and Dawkins have been beaten out of sight re the Kiesle case. For one thing the article by Phil Lawlor, an experienced journalist, blew you and Dawkins sky high out of the water.
ReplyDeleteGENE
THAT KIESLE WAS ABLE TO ABUSE WAS DOWN TO THE PINKO/LIBERALS OF CALIFORNIA.
ReplyDeleteThe State of California gave Kiesle a slap on the wrist (probation) for his heinous crimes. California also did not put him on the sex offenders register.
That's where the blame lies Detterling. But of course you and Dawkins do not want to acknowledge that as it does not fit with your agenda.
GENE
No, Gene, this will not do.
DeleteAs I have demonstrated to you several times, there can be no doubt that Joseph Ratzinger's actions in refusing to unfrock Stephen Keisle enabled Fr Keisle to go on abusing children for a further two years.
I have also acknowledged that Ratzinger shares the blame for Fr Keisle's career of abuse going on for far longer than it should with the state of California.
The key word however is SHARED. Had Ratzinger done as he was asked in 1985 and unfrocked Keisle, and had he and the Catholic authorities pursued the state of California to rescind their lenient treatment of Keisle, then Fr Keisle would not have continued to bugger small boys and rape small girls for a further three years.
Your attempt to exculpate the Catholic church at large and Ratzinger in particular from any responsibility for Keisle's seventeen year career of abuse is disgusting behaviour.
And do not imagine that I will not continue to rebut and refute your lying allegations so that you can claim the kind of bogus "victory" you so often claimed on TES opinion.
You are wrong on this issue, you know you are wrong, and I am going to go on telling you that you are wrong until you stop being an arsehole and apologise for your blasphemous and vicious malice.
Well said Gene.
ReplyDeleteSebastian D'Orsai
Gene, do stop it. We all know that Sebastian D'Orsai is you, because no-one reads this pile of shite except me.
DeleteAnd, typically, Gene, you have been too lazy, sloppy and ignorant to check which party the Governors of California belonged to during Keisle's disgraceful [and Vatican sanctioned] career. They were predominantly Republican, such as the well known pinko-liberal Ronald Reagan.
ReplyDeleteYou stupid pillock.
Pinko/liberals have always held sway in California and we are not here talking necessarily about politicians. Had Kiesle been defrocked on the very day of his conviction it would have meant nothing in respect of his future offending. The effective way of stopping him was to place him on the sex offenders register.
ReplyDeleteBlame the pinko/liberals in California.
GENE
No, Gene, this will not do.
DeleteAs I have demonstrated to you several times, there can be no doubt that Joseph Ratzinger's actions in refusing to unfrock Stephen Keisle enabled Fr Keisle to go on abusing children for a further two years.
I have also acknowledged that Ratzinger shares the blame for Fr Keisle's career of abuse going on for far longer than it should with the state of California.
The key word however is SHARED. Had Ratzinger done as he was asked in 1985 and unfrocked Keisle, and had he and the Catholic authorities pursued the state of California to rescind their lenient treatment of Keisle, then Fr Keisle would not have continued to bugger small boys and rape small girls for a further three years.
Your attempt to exculpate the Catholic church at large and Ratzinger in particular from any responsibility for Keisle's seventeen year career of abuse is disgusting behaviour.
And do not imagine that I will not continue to rebut and refute your lying allegations so that you can claim the kind of bogus "victory" you so often claimed on TES opinion.
You are wrong on this issue, you know you are wrong, and I am going to go on telling you that you are wrong until you stop being an arsehole and apologise for your blasphemous and vicious malice.
"Your attempt to exculpate the Catholic church at large and Ratzinger in particular from any responsibility for Keisle's seventeen year career of abuse is disgusting behaviour."
ReplyDeleteSo ipso facto this must apply too to the journalist Phil Lawler?
Detterling you take the biscuit!
"So ipso facto this must apply too to the journalist Phil Lawler?"
ReplyDeleteMr Lawler is a Catholic of long standing - and evidently a devout one. For example, he has seven children, which suggests that unlike bogus Catholics of your sort, Gene "Fetherlite" Vincent. He is also the director of an online foundation "Catholic Culture". He is plainly a very able writer but, like you, unable to accept that his hero, Ratzinger, conducted himself with criminal incompetence over the Keisle case.
And to that extent the article by Mr Lawler that you reprinted a few weeks ago is a disgusting performance.
So up yours.
FROM THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, APRIL 18th 2010:
ReplyDeleteTHE ABUSER WHO WANTED TO BE DEFROCKED [1]
BY VICTORIA KIM APRIL 18, 2010 12 AM PT
In the early summer of 1978, police arrived at a Union City church looking for the younger of its two pastors, Stephen Kiesle. He was away, so officers informed the senior pastor, Father George Crespin, that Kiesle was wanted for molesting six children at the church and that there was a warrant for his arrest. When Kiesle returned to the city south of Oakland, Crespin confronted him with the allegations. Kiesle sighed. He seemed relieved, as if he had been waiting for this day to come, Crespin recalled. Kiesle surrendered to authorities and eventually pleaded no contest to criminal charges of molesting children. A few years later, in 1981, he asked to be defrocked, something that would require Vatican approval. Crespin thought Kiesle’s request, which was supported by the Diocese of Oakland, would be quickly granted.
But in a 1985 letter made public last week, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then the Vatican’s chief enforcer of doctrine and now Pope Benedict XVI, declined to immediately defrock Kiesle, citing the priest’s young age and the “good of the Universal Church.” It would be two more years before the Vatican finally granted the request. Crespin was shocked by Rome’s reluctance.
“We didn’t anticipate the obstacles that we were going to have to face in Rome,” Crespin recalled in an interview with The Times at his current church in Berkeley. “It was like a friendly divorce. . . . We thought, as they say in the sports world, that it was going to be a slam dunk. . . . It was so clear that this is what should be done, and to have [the Vatican] not see it that way was frustrating.”
The letter has become a flash point in the current debate over the pope’s handling of priestly abuse cases. But it was only one element of the response by the church hierarchy -- stretching from the East Bay to the Vatican -- to years of abuse at the hands of Kiesle. There remain questions today about how the case was handled. While the diocese was trying to have the priest defrocked, a pastor in the town of Pinole, north of Oakland, allowed Kiesle to volunteer at his church for seven years in various youth programs. He continued to serve at the church even after the Vatican finally removed him as a priest in 1987. The diocese insisted this week that it had no idea Kiesle was volunteering there until the matter was brought to Bishop John Cummins’ attention in 1988. Cummins then sent the church pastor a letter demanding that Kiesle immediately be removed. The pastor, who is now deceased, defended his decision at the time, telling the diocese there was no evidence Kiesle abused anyone while volunteering.
Kiesle was eventually removed as a church volunteer that year. Seven years later, authorities said he was again abusing. Kiesle grew up in San Jose, and acquaintances said he was drawn to the priesthood in part by his mother, a devout Catholic. When he was a young priest in the early 1970s, people said he resembled a 6-foot-tall teddy bear. He quickly became known for his empathy with children, playing guitar, telling engaging yarns and seeming to connect with young people in a way not many priests did. Across the Oakland Diocese, pastors called on him to help set up programs for children in their congregations.
“Kids followed him,” recalled Msgr. Antonio Valdivia, who worked with Kiesle briefly in Union City. “He was known for his work with the youth . . . energizing the kids, speaking their language, relating and connecting with them.”
continued