I'm in shock. TIME magazine followed up their original story about the pregnant teens of Gloucester, but now suggesting that the girls' decision is not just one of personal choice, but one of rejecting abortion and "taking responsibility." And the credit is partly given to crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs).
You must read the whole piece, which reeks of anti-choice language, but the last paragraph really says it all:
Whether a girl--or a woman--decides to end a pregnancy or see it through is as complex an emotional and moral and medical calculation as she ever faces. But I wonder if some soft message has taken hold when the data suggest that more women facing hard choices are deciding to carry the child to term. This has been the mission of the crisis-pregnancy-center movement, the more than 4,000 centers and hotlines and support groups around the country that aim to talk women out of having abortions and offer whatever support they can. If not in Hollywood, then certainly in Gloucester, teen parents and their babies face long odds against success in life. Surely they deserve more sympathy and support than shame and derision, if the trend that they reflect is not a typical teenager's inclination to have sex but rather a willingness to take responsibility for the consequences. (Emphasis mine)
Now, we obviously know these girls shouldn't be shamed in any way regarding their decision to have sex or to go full term with their pregnancies. But to imply that it's more responsible to have a child than to have an abortion is just ridiculous. And I won't even get into the fact that the piece blatantly lauds crisis pregnancy centers and the "support" they apparently give women. If by "support," she means deceiving and misleading women to believe they're giving them all of their options - sure. "Support."
And it's not surprising considering the author; Nancy Gibbs wrote an article in TIME last year all about how CPCs help women titled, "The Grassroots Abortion War", with headline conveniently placed over an image of a crib. Send a letter to the editor and let Gibbs and TIME know they're promoting deceiving organizations.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: TIME Magazine Hearts CPCs.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/7727
This is what I sent them:
Nancy Gibbs did a disservice to women everywhere with her article "Give the Girls a Break." At the end, she credited so-called "crisis pregnancy centers" (CPCs) with "talk[ing] women out of having abortions and offer[ing] whatever support they can." While they do, in fact, aim to talk women out of abortions, what they offer is far from support.
These centers use scare tactics, pressure, and flat-out lies to keep women from making their own reproductive choices. Many CPCs deliberately position themselves very close to legitimate women's health clinics to cause confusion. They do whatever they can to trick women into entering their "clinic" instead of the real one, then once she is inside they try and scare and brainwash her so she can't make an informed choice. On the phone, they won't give out any information and will insist you visit the clinic.
Frequently CPCs won't even tell a woman whether or not she is pregnant, especially if she says she wants an abortion. They will instead sit her down and tell her all the "evils" of abortion, many of which are completely untrue. Their lobbies and waiting areas are full of religious and anti-choice propaganda, most of which is based on intimidation and blatantly false information. Women who have accidentally entered these places report harassment, as well as being forced to pray with center employees and even being followed home or later hassled by phone or mail. To any woman out there: if you find yourself in one of these centers get out immediately. Don't stop to tell anyone, don't wait for your test results; get out, find a legitimate clinic, and make your own informed decision.
These centers do not, in fact, help women of any age "take responsibility" for having sex. The best way to take responsibility for your sexual activity is to protect yourself with contraceptives, get regular health screenings and keep yourself informed of your reproductive choices, including both carrying to term and deciding to abort. Any choice a woman makes about her pregnancy is taking responsibility, and no woman should ever feel pressured or be lied to in order to sway her decision.
Nancy Gibbs (author of the follow-up TIME article) really wimps out with her non-explanations of teen pregnancy:
And among teenage girls, though the birthrate has generally been falling for the past two decades, it did rise 3% in 2006 for girls 15 to 17. No one can quite explain why this is.
Oh really? No one? C'mon! Perhaps all the abstince-only education? Rates have been falling since 1990 precisely because of in-depth, inclusive sexual education (at least in some locations)--including STD and pregnancy prevention.
Only when the Bush administration's super-effective abstince-only bullshit started taking the place of real sex ed in schools did these trends change.
She wants to talk about a "willingness to take responsibility for the consequeneces"--what about a willingness to be "responsible" in the first place? What about a willingness to be realistic with our children about sex?