I’m writing to express my concern about the proliferation of Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs) in Minnesota and to call for their defunding, suggesting alternative programs to allocate the Positive Alternatives Grant toward.
CPCs are deceitful, fraudulent organizations masquerading as comprehensive reproductive health clinics. Furthermore, their sheer existence in our community stops people from getting the timely, clinical support and information they need. This is an intentional effort on the part of CPCs, often placing themselves in or near marginalized communities and targeting low-income mothers with free pregnancy testing and ultrasounds. Additionally, CPCs often use “co-location,” a practice of setting up shop near a medical center to boost their credibility and increase the chances people will mistakenly wander in.
The claim that CPCs are inherently deceptive is one with a vast array of evidence, starting with a 2021 study finding that, across the 600-plus centers analyzed, only 16.3% had a physician on staff. Furthermore, most of these physicians are employed only on a part-time or volunteer basis, many of whom hold degrees in unrelated fields such as optometry.
The lying doesn’t stop there, though. In fact, more than 63% of centers in the same study proudly boast inaccurate and biased information on their websites. These claims largely include mental health, infertility, breast cancer and “post-abortion syndrome.” In Minnesota, the rate of these claims is even higher than in the national study.
Seventy-six percent of Minnesota CPC’s link abortion to breast cancer, and 73% claim abortion is tied to future miscarriage. These statistics highlight the prevalence of deception and biased information being freely distributed to impressionable mothers in crisis.
But how do Minnesota CPCs get the money to operate, you ask? That’s right, state grants from the Positive Alternatives Grant Program, which provided more than $3.4 million last year alone. Not only are Minnesota CPCs openly advocating against state-supported abortions, they are doing so under state funding. If this seems contradictory, that’s because it is. If we, as Minnesotans, are a state proud of our position on reproductive rights, why are we funding programs that openly challenge that mission while spreading harmful misinformation?
In answer to these moral questions, I propose that we defund CPCs, instead developing short and long-term programs that more accurately address the needs of mothers in crisis. This means developing community-based clinics in and around marginalized communities, staffed by trained professionals to provide pregnancy testing, ultrasounds, accurate information and more. In addition to defunding CPCs, we must also work towards long-term solutions such as sexual education in schools, providing youth unbiased and accurate information on safe sex practices and prenatal care. By investing in education, we can empower women to make informed decisions about their reproductive health and ensure that all people have the resources they need to avoid unwanted pregnancies in the first place.
Tyler Rooks is Masters of Social Work student at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota.
I don’t know where to start with Mr. Rooks’ illogic.
You assert you know what CPC intentions are. First, there are many of them, and they are not mostly connected. So you are really asserting you know the intentions of many, many people. Pretty obvious that’s not likely. Translation: You are lying to us.
That shoots your credibility.
Then you assert that because they put themselves near marginalized communities and offer those communities free pregnancy tests, ultrasounds and other help, that ‘proves’ their intent to stop those communities from getting the help they need.
What?
And…the fact they don’t have doctors on staff (based on a study you don’t cite) proves their ill intentions? Ummm…information for you: Doctors rarely give ultrasounds or do pregnancy tests. Nurses or paraprofessionals do.
Ill stop there. Since you are in a masters program in social work, you can’t claim you don’t know the standard of proof required in making these claims. Your bluster and half-truths (or perhaps outright lies) hint at your true motive:
Any pregnancy center that doesn’t do abortions is evil, awful, and must be stopped.
I say let people choose. You don’t think ‘marginalized people’ are smart enough to make informed choices.
What an elitist. You have contempt for the very people you claim to champion.
Go home and try writing something that meets some bare minimum standard of journalistic evidence.
Hi Mr. Frost, I am SO honored that you made an account specifically to write this comment, it seems we’re both first-timers here *high five*. Unfortunately, I don’t work for MinnPost and my APA citations didn’t make it through to publication. Here they are if you’re truly interested:
McIntire, L. (2015). Crisis Pregnancy Centers Lie: The Insidious Threat to Reproductive Freedom. NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, 28.
McKenna, J., & Murtha, T. (2021). Designed to Deceive: A Study of the Crisis Pregnancy Center Industry in Nine States. The Alliance State Advocates, 72.
Kian, A. (2023, March 6). Why did the community protest against a new ‘crisis pregnancy center’ in the Phillips area? MinnPost. https://www.minnpost.com/race-health-equity/2023/03/why-did-the-community-protest-against-a-new-crisis-pregnancy-center-in-the-phillips-area/
Anyway, I hope you have a nice day.
Hey there sport – this is a community voices piece, her opinion.
You might want to step back off your high horse, or better yet, you could write one, then we can all take pot shots at your opinion too.
“her opinion”?
Not sure why you think the author is a woman. Tyler seems more like a man’s name than a woman’s name. I honestly don’t know and wouldn’t assume anything. Did you assume that the author was a woman because the issue was abortion?
In any event, just because it is a community voice piece it doesn’t mean that commenters can’t point out things that they think are incorrect. I don’t think that Larry Frost’s response was that great, but he didn’t personally attack the author. You would have been better off helping the author by pointing out why their arguments are correct and why Larry Frost’s response was off base.
Funny how the pro choice crowd doesn’t really like it when someone offers a choice other than abortion. I’m not really sure why a doctor is required to offer support such as diapers, cribs, baby clothes and financial grants for housing or vehicles. And please let me know when Planned Parenthood offers those things to families.
I consider myself to be a squishy prochoice person and I cannot understand how anyone can be against any organization that offers alternatives to abortion.
Personally, I’d like the state to stop funding both sides of the abortion debate. Advocates on both sides of the issue could raise money themselves instead.
Its not the alternative, its the organizations.
So alternatives are ok, but facilitating those alternatives is not. Got it.
Other than abortion, what alternative does PP offer? Do they offer baby clothes? Do they help a woman afford maternity or pediatric services?
If course not. They have a hammer, and every problem is a nail.
Neither do the CPC. They offer bribes at the cost of indoctrination and shame, while offering nothing of medical value at all. But by all means, support the christian nationalists and see how far it gets you.
Thing is, that’s not the only service they offer. Here’s the list of women’s health services from their website:
Breast Exams
Cervical Cancer Screenings
Colposcopy
Cryotherapy
Incontinence
Infertility
LEEP
Mammogram Referrals
Menopause Testing and Treatment
Pap Test
Sexual Response Education
UTI Testing and Treatment
Vaginal Infections Testing and Treatment
Other Women’s Health Services
See that one in the middle there? INFERTILITY? That’s right, planned parenthood will actually help people, you know, PLAN to get pregnant. Yes, they do also offer services for people who need to deal with unplanned pregnancies, including abortion. But they offer way more than that.
Huh?
That isn’t the route I would go given the past history (and some fairly modern contretemps) of Planned Parenthood. Glass houses/stones and all that.
When I said alternatives, I was referring to the crisis pregnancy centers. Are you against the organizations running those centers, or the very existence of those centers?
Both, in their current guise. But you know me, just an old eugenicist here. Hey, do the history of the church, any church, next.
Offeeing other choices is fine. It’s the lies and deception that are offensive.
“We are and will be here for you. We can help with things like diapers, strollers, clothes, rent…”
Those are not lies.
IF you submit to our religious tests.
Offering childcare supplies is generous.
Offering lies & misinformation is immoral, unethical and offensive, particularly when they’re misleading people in crisis.
“more than 63% of centers in the same study proudly boast inaccurate and biased information on their websites. These claims largely include mental health, infertility, breast cancer and “post-abortion syndrome.” In Minnesota, the rate of these claims is even higher than in the national study.”
Moderator nixed my last attempt at some humor so how’s this? Simple fix: pass a statute mandating that in order to receive public funding, these centers must visibly post that they do not perform or do abortion counseling. Then you can chill on the paternalistic progressive burden treating marginalized folks as lesser than you.
And would you require PP to post a notice that they only offer abortion, and nothing in the way of alternatives like clothing, emotional support, financial support, etc?
Sure. If that is true. All centers should post the services they offer if they get govt money. Seems easy enough.
As previously stated, PP provide a heck of a lot more than you seem to grasp.
How’s about this for a simple fix. Take your religion and stuff it where the sun doesn’t shine. Your sign can explain for which christian nationalist your special little “clinic” is a front.
Religion? I have none, dispise most, including the new progressive church of self flagellating victim worship.
Try arguing that the sign I propose isn’t a simple fix for much of what this article is concerned with. Your reflexive jump to what you think my beliefs are is comical.
You honestly don’t recognize the elevation of collective victemhood on the progressive left? The discourse around “trauma” , “oppression”, “micro aggressions”, “toxic masculinity” etc. Etc. should help you understand. To be some type of perceived victem is a social currency in those circles.
I never said anything about right wing victemhood complexs because they’re largely covered in the most religion part of my comment. Trump? I have no interest in discussing him and could care if he rots.