Archive for American Eugenics Society

Group that brought abortion pill to US has eugenics history

Posted in Abortion pill, American Eugenics Society, Bernard Berelson, Eugenics, Every Child a Wanted Child, Frank Notestein, Frederick OSborn, Guttmacher, Population Council, RU-486 with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 20, 2017 by saynsumthn

The Population Council has a shocking 65-year history, and it’s nothing to celebrate

(From Live Action News)

John D Rockefeller-founded Population-Council

The Population Council, the eugenics organization credited with bringing the abortion pill RU-486 to the United States, turns 65 this month — but it is nothing to celebrate.

In 1952, John D. Rockefeller III founded the Population Council and served as the organization’s first president.  According to the Rockefeller Foundation, the Population Council, Inc., was incorporated following Rockefeller’s Conference on Population Problems, “…to stimulate, encourage, promote, conduct and support significant activities in the broad field of population.”

Like its founder, the Population Council’s other members were concerned about population issues — and, like other population organizations such as Planned Parenthood, high ranking Population Council leaders were well connected to the eugenics movement.

Frederick Osborn

 

Frederic Osborn followed Rockefeller as Population Council president in 1957. Osborn was a founding member of the American Eugenics Society who signed Margaret Sanger’s “Citizens Committee for Planned Parenthood,” published in April of 1938. Osborn once wrote, “Eugenic goals are most likely attained under a name other than eugenics.” Some speculate that Planned Parenthood’s infamous slogan, “Every Child a Wanted Child,” may have originated with Osborn. It is no wonder that Osborn also said that “Birth Control and abortion are turning out to be the great eugenic advances of our time.”

Frank W Notestein

Frank W. Notestein followed Osborn as president in 1959. Like Osborn, he was member of the American Eugenics Society and as the American Philosophical Society, according to a biography published by Princeton University. He was also one of the organization’s original four trustees, according to the Population Council’s 1957 Annual Report.

In 1939, Notestein and Osborn served together on the Medical Advisory Board for Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Federation. By 1967, under Notestein’s leadership, the Population Council released a controversial film, entitled “Family Planning,” which featured Disney’s iconic cartoon figure Donald Duck. It was one of many efforts in the 1960s and ’70s to indoctrinate the culture on the use of birth control.

By 1970, Notestein was serving on the Board of Directors of Planned Parenthood-World Population.

Bernard Berelson

Bernard Berelson took the helm of Population Council in 1968, as its fourth president. A year later, in 1969, Berelson published an article which suggested that if voluntary methods of birth control were not successful, it may become necessary for the government to put a “fertility control agent” in the water supplies of “urban” neighborhoods. The article was published in the journal, “Studies in Family Planning,” published by the Population Council. Berelson was also featured in the Population Council’s first issue of “Population and Development Review.”

 

Alan F. Guttmacher, M.D. sat on the Population Council’s first Medical Advisory Board. Guttmacher, a former Planned Parenthood president, was also vice president of the American Eugenics Society. His ideas of forced or compulsory population control measures were in lock-step with Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger, who made sure that Planned Parenthood was knee deep in eugenics. Guttmacher’s namesake institution, the Guttmacher Institute, would later be referred to as a “research arm” and a “special affiliate” of Planned Parenthood.

Alan Guttmacher, president of past Planned Parenthood (screenshot: CBS news)

Thomas Parran, Jr. was on the original Population Council’s board of trustees. On paper, he has a very distinguished career, having been named the nation’s sixth U.S. Surgeon General, building support for the passage of Social Security as well as the establishment of the World Health Organization. His name even appeared on the public health building of the University of Pittsburgh as “one of the giants of 20th-century medicine.”

Thomas Parran (Photo: NIH/NLM)

But according to USA Today, “Parran’s legacy was tainted in 2010, when the U.S. government apologized to Guatemala for the syphilis experiments that exposed 1,308 men, women and children to syphilis without consent from 1946 to 1948. Parran approved of the experiments, conducted by U.S. Public Health Service physician John Cutler.” (Cutler and his wife Eleise contributed to the Population Council and Cutler’s wife admitted that she served on the board of Planned Parenthood.)

Earlier this year, Philly.com reported that Parran was suspected of being the “intellectual inspiration of the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study”:

Regrettably, Parran’s great work, impressive resume, and proud legacy are besmirched by his ethical violations. The truth of his association with horrendous experiments using impoverished Alabama sharecroppers, federal prison inmates, and an array of vulnerable subjects in Guatemala who were purposefully infected with syphilis were already known. But newly discovered evidence disclosing his role as the architect of the Tuskegee study may have caused his already troubling case to reach the tipping point…

Pitt trustees now must confront evidence showing Parran was more than a distant bureaucrat during the Tuskegee study. New documents disclose that Parran believed the African American population of Macon County, Ala., was perfect for a nontreatment exercise. “If one wished to study the natural history of syphilis in the Negro race uninfluenced by treatment,” Parran wrote in January 1932, “this county would be an ideal location for such a study.”

Eugenics founded Guttmacher praises Eugenics founded Population Council which turned 65

The Rockefeller family has long been connected to eugenics. According to author Rebecca Messall, “Rockefeller money funded eugenic scientists decades before Hitler put eugenic theories into practice.”

Rockefeller eugenics (image: New York Times)

According to author Edwin Black (emphasis added), “Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America’s most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as Stamford, Yale, Harvard, and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics’ racist aims… The Rockefeller Foundation helped found the German eugenics program and even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz.”

According to author Edwin Black (emphasis added), “Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America’s most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as Stamford, Yale, Harvard, and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics’ racist aims… The Rockefeller Foundation helped found the German eugenics program and even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz.”

Black added, “In May 1926, Rockefeller awarded $250,000 to the German Psychiatric Institute of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, later to become the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry. Among the leading psychiatrists at the German Psychiatric Institute was Ernst Rüdin, who became director and eventually an architect of Hitler’s systematic medical repression.” (NOTE: In 1933, Rüdin’s call for racial purity was published in Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Review. According to the documentary film, Maafa21, Rudin would be chosen by Hitler to write Germany’s eugenics laws.)

Rockefeller III once claimed that birth control was “directly related to the matter of meaningful peace.”

In her review of the book, “Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population,” written by Columbia University historian Matthew Connelly, C-Fam author Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D, discovered what led up to Rockefeller’s founding of the Population Council:

John D Rockefeller III (Image: Rockefeller Foundation)

In 1952, at a secret, invitation-only gathering in Colonial Williamsburg, John D. Rockefeller III brought together what would become the modern population control establishment. Setting the agenda for the following decades were the heads of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, National Academy of Sciences, and top scientists “from embryology to economics,” including past and present Nobel Prize winners.

From verbatim transcripts of the “Conference on Population Problems,” just one of the countless number of such meetings the book exposes, Connelly found that what drove them were the questions of how many people the world could hold along with “whether ‘industrial development should be withheld’ from poor, agrarian countries like India.” By decreasing mortality and encouraging “breeding,” development would increase inferior populations and further degrade “the genetic quality of the human race.” They decided radical measures to reduce birthrates were justified in order to save “Western Civilization” from being dragged down by the growing humanitarian demands of Third World countries.

Thus was born the Population Council, which would in turn become the nexus of the entire population control movement, going on to coordinate the work of the United Nations, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) – founded three weeks later – as well as major pharmaceutical firms.

In 1994, with the encouragement of the Clinton administration, french pharmaceutical manufacturer Roussel-Uclaf assigned the US rights of marketing and distribution of abortion pill RU-486 to the Population Council. The right to distribute the harmful drugs were later handed over to Danco Laboratories, a sub-licensee of the Population Council.

In 2015, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that from fiscal year 2010 through 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) reported sending about $236 million to six organizations and their affiliates and member associations: Advocates for Youth, Guttmacher Institute, International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), and the Population Council.

Today, abortion remains among the Population Council’s strategic priorities, according to its latest annual report.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Planned Parentrhood’s “Blueprint” to force taxpayers to pay for birth control began under Guttmacher

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 3, 2017 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood has always been about making sure fewer poor people actually become parents — and here’s proof

In 1966, Planned Parenthood‘s medical director, Alan Guttmacher (a former VP for the American Eugenics Society and founder of the Guttmacher Institute), proposed a blueprint to force taxpayers to pay for birth control access for the poor. Elected to Planned Parenthood’s national board in 1962, Guttmacher believed (as did many eugenicists) that the poor needed access to birth control.

But while publicly, the messaging was one of empowering others to make “choices,” the real motivation was population control. Guttmacher once told the New York Times, “The main goal of our program is not just to limit population, but to give everyone the same opportunity for quality medical care.” Note that Guttmacher acknowledged population control as one of the goals, but clothed it in the same type of messaging used by modern-day Planned Parenthood: the language of access to “health care” or “medical care.”

Planned Parenthood’s ultimate goal was to convince the public that taxpayer-funded “family planning” — directed at preventing births among the poor — would save the taxpayer money. And, just like today, the nation’s largest abortion provider accomplished this goal with the help of politicians on both sides of the aisle.

In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson lent his support to taxpayer funded “family planning” efforts, stating in a speech that for every five dollars spent on population control, more than a hundred would be invested in economic growth. The scheme to promote the use of taxpayer dollars as a way to “reduce costs” was detailed in the film Maafa21:

The “plan” — described by a 1966 NYT article as a “partnership of public and private agencies” — was to make birth control services “freely available to every American by 1970” in an effort to prevent about 250,000 pregnancies every year. It was presented at Planned Parenthood’s New York headquarters by the organization’s then-president, George N. Lindsay, who called it the “best bargain in health services that money could buy.”

Planned Parenthood president George N Lindsay (image credit: NYT)

“We have the technological know-how — pills and intrauterine devices,” Lindsay is quoted as saying. “We have the support of Government. President Johnson has called for increased birth control services in the past two State of the Union messages. And now we have devised a methodology for solving a huge problem in five years.”

That same year, President Johnson accepted Planned Parenthood’s highest award (the Margaret Sanger Award) for his policies pushing family planning for foreign countries. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Sanger’s work in the eugenics movement has been highly criticized by many modern African-American leaders. Sanger, who gave at least one speech to the Ku Klux Klan and stacked Planned Parenthood’s boards with eugenicists, advocated the sterilization of the so-called “unfit.”

Today, despite her involvement in the eugenics movement, Planned Parenthood labels Sanger a heroine and has positioned her name in a place of honor on at least one of its centers.

Margaret Sanger’s name on Planned Parenthood building

By 1969, the so-called “Planned Parenthood blueprint” to force taxpayers to fund birth control was underway, as recounted by the New York Times:

Whatever the merits of the argument, the ghetto approach is now the federation’s chief thrust, and it is also the policy of the Federal Government, which since 1966 has undergone a dramatic reversal,  moving from almost no action on birth control to a proposed expenditure in 1969 of $31 million. Last month the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) recommended the adoption of Planned Parenthood’s “blueprint” for supplying free birth control device to some five million American women below the poverty line.

The “plan” was highly criticized by the Black community, which saw the move as a means of racist Black genocide.  “Among other things, this policy has brought the Planned Parenthood Federation under attack from black militants who see ‘family planning’ as a euphemism for race genocide,” the NYT reported.

To prove the genocidal fear had merit among minority groups, the paper published statistics that supported “the suspicion that Black people are taking the brunt of the ‘planning.’” Black birth rates fell in several cities:

  • Lincoln Parish, LA: 32% (1966-67)
  • Washington, DC : 24% (three years)
  • Baltimore, MD: 36% (since 1965)

A 1966 internal memo from Alan Guttmacher and Fred Jaffe outlined a new “community relations program” for winning over the Black community by “form[ing] a liaison between Planned Parenthood and minority organizations.” The plan, according to Planned Parenthood, was to emphasize that “all people have the opportunity to make their own choices,” rather than, as the memo states, exhortation telling them how many children they should have.”

Guttmacher said at the time that the plan was “long overdue” but stressed, “we do not need to panic. In fact, if we panic and continue to publicize the ‘problem’, we may well exacerbate it.”

Also in 1966, Planned Parenthood gave its Margaret Sanger Award to Martin Luther King, Jr. Whatever Planned Parenthood was trying to accomplish, it worked. By 1969, then Congressman George H.W. Bush (R-Texas) chaired the Republican Task Force on Population and Earth Resources, created in part to ascertain the resistance to family planning among “certain groups.” He determined that “[s]o far, it looks like opposition from religious groups and the Black militants isn’t too serious.”

Planned Parenthood’s “blueprint” called for an expenditure of about one percent of the nation’s health budget, with an anticipated $78 million from taxpayers in 1970. It also called for an expansion of hospitals’ family planning services as well as programs financed by the federal anti-poverty program. By 1970, the United States House of Representatives voted 298 to 32 to approve the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act, Title X of the Public Health Service Act, authorizing federal dollars to pay for family planning services for low-income women. This legislation would become known as the Title X statute, which today allocates millions of federal tax dollars to Planned Parenthood and other family planning organizations.

In 1971, Congress allocated $6,000,000 for the Title X program. The following year, funding was increased to ten times as much: $61,815,000. Title X funding peaked in 2010 with a high of $317,491,000 and dropped to $286,479,000 for fiscal year 2017. President Trump’s FY2018 budget request includes $286.5 million for Title X, the same as the FY2017 enacted level.

TitleX Funding History CBO

Although Federal law prohibits the use of Title X funds in programs where abortion is a method of family planning, recipients of the dollars can be abortion providers. The reason for this is that Title X requirements allow recipients of these federal dollars to discuss abortion with patients under the term “options counseling,” telling providers that they must offer pregnant women the opportunity to receive information and counseling on each of the following options:

  • prenatal care and delivery
  • infant care, foster care, or adoption
  • pregnancy termination

In other words, Planned Parenthood can use the same rooms within the same facilities to commit abortions as they do to perform “options counseling,” during which they can refer for abortions as well as provide tax-funded family planning services under Title X.

Live Action investigations have already documented the abysmal way that Planned Parenthood handles inquiries from pregnant women seeking prenatal care at their facilities. With few exceptions, abortion is the only option Planned Parenthood offers pregnant women:

Research conducted by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) reveals that Planned Parenthood affiliates participating in Title X spent $64.35 million in taxpayer dollars in 2012.

Despite deceptive marketing from politicians who claim that defunding the abortion corporation would hurt women, studies show that women do not need Planned Parenthood to get contraception care. Despite Planned Parenthood’s desperate attempt to reinvent itself as a health care provider, it is the number one provider of abortions in the United States, claiming 35 percent of the abortion market share nationwide. The organization has millions of dollars in excess revenue each year (despite its being classified as a nonprofit organization), and has recently boasted of the private donations flooding into its coffers.

In addition, actual health care services at Planned Parenthood are dwindling while abortions are increasing. In addition, Planned Parenthood is not a trusted recipient of tax dollars, with its history of fraud and abuse and its failure to report suspected child abuse (which Live Action News reported about here and here) — a reason that alone should result in the organization losing taxpayer dollars under Title X.

Planned Parenthood’s free birth control scheme has resulted in millions upon millions in taxpayer funding each year. Instead of those dollars doing good for women, they are aiding an abortion corporation which ends the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent preborn babies every year. That is not a blueprint that anyone should follow.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Former Planned Parenthood president: forced birth control would be ‘desirable’

Posted in American Eugenics Society, Eugenics, Guttmacher, Population Control with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 3, 2017 by saynsumthn

A former Planned Parenthood president and vice president of the American Eugenics Society once advocated that if families did not limit births to just two children, then compulsory methods of population control could be necessary.  The idea, proposed by Dr. Alan F. Guttmacher, a well-known eugenicist and one-time president of Planned Parenthood who established the Guttmacher Institute, came on the heels of radical proposals by Planned Parenthood board members and others that immediate compulsory means should be used to curtail population growth.

In 1970, Guttmacher addressed a group concerned about the so-called “population explosion.” Lee McCall, a reporter for the Sarasota Herald Tribune, attended the conference and noted that Guttmacher, as president of Planned Parenthood World Population “for the past eight years,” was invited to speak under the sponsorship of Planned Parenthood of Sarasota County, Inc.

McCall spoke with Guttmacher about “discussions” that had been floating around to limit children within families to “2 or 3.”

McCall wrote:

There has been discussion of limiting families to 2.2 children.

Dr. Guttmacher feels it inadvisable for Planned Parenthood to boldly vocalize such a plan.

‘It would be difficult,’ he said, ‘In the first place it would probably split the organization. Also we would have trouble with minority groups accepting this.’

Despite his apparent hesitancy towards coercion, McCall goes on to quote Guttmacher as admitting that such a “plan” of compulsory population control would be “desirable.”

“So even though the plan may be desirable and would make us a stronger nation, a less polluted nation, I feel it would be strategically unwise at this time,” the former Planned Parenthood president told the reporter.

Keep in mind, this is the very organization which allegedly claims it was founded on freedom of choice. And Guttmacher was attempting to dispel the theory that abortion and birth control were racist efforts of genocide aimed to limit the birth rate of the Black community.

Racism seen as denting Birth Control 1966

This admission was profound and came shortly after the New York Times attempted to paint Guttmacher as a wanting “volunteer” birth control measures only.

In its 1969 article entitled, “Dr. Guttmacher is the Evangelist of Birth Control,” the New York Times was forced to acknowledge that many leaders sitting on Planned Parenthood’s board were in favor of coercive measures of population control. While painting the picture of an agency which was pushing birth control on the “ghetto” rather than the “middle-class” who were having more than the optimal amount of children, the paper noted that a “sizable” number of Planned Parenthood’s board was made up of “preponderantly white and well-to-do” people. They then quoted a Planned Parenthood board member who admitted the racist attitude of the organization, when he stated:

What it all comes down to is that we want the poor to stop breeding while we retain our freedom to have large families. It’s strictly a class point of view.

However, despite the majority of Planned Parenthood’s board holding a “class” point of view regarding who should be “encouraged” to use contraception, if Guttmacher was for “voluntary measures” of population control, compulsory measures were never ruled out.  Because, as the Planned Parenthood president saw it, if “voluntary measures” did not work, then force would be necessary.

This point of view can clearly be seen in a 1969 article from Medical World News Reports, in which Guttmacher floated the possibility that coercion could be used. His shocking statement was published by the Sarasota Herald Tribune where it quoted Guttmacher as suggesting that, “Each country will have to decide its own form of coercion, and determine when and how it should be employed.”

Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

The following year (1970) Guttmacher told an audience at New Mexico State University that, “[…] if by 1990, the population is still growing at a rate of 2% then we must go to some kind of compulsory birth control.” (emphasis added).

Earlier in 1966, Guttmacher compared the world population with the threat of nuclear war and told the Washington Post that governments may have to act officially to limit families saying, “It may be taken out of the voluntary category.”

In his 1959 book, “Babies by Choice or By Chance”, Guttmacher described the atomic bomb as “more merciless to our generation” and “more kinder to future generations” than “the explosion of the population bomb.” He bemoaned the fact that death rates were lowering, while birth rates were on the rise, writing, “Therefore if we want to decelerate the rate of population growth, it must be done by conception control.”

Babies by Choice or By Chance, by Alan F Guttmacher

This idea of temporary volunteerism was also noted by author Angela Franks, who wrote in her book, “Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Legacy: The Control of Female Fertility”, that, “in the late 1960’s, Guttmacher put a limit on volunteerism: if we don’t see a population decline by 1980, he said, ‘we’ll have to get tough.’”

The fact is that Guttmacher’s ideas of forced or compulsory population control measures were in lock-step with Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger. After all, they were both members of the very racist American Eugenics Society, with Guttmacher serving as the group’s vice-president. As Live Action News has documented in the past, Sanger made sure that Planned Parenthood was knee deep in eugenics.

But, rarely reported by contemporary media is the fact that Sanger once suggested that parents should be required to have a “license” to even be allowed to have children at all.

License to Breed Margaret Sanger

In her “A License for Mothers to Have Babies” with the subtitle, “A code to stop the overproduction of children.” Sanger outlined her plan article by article, which read in part (emphasis mine):

A marriage license shall in itself give husband and wife only the right to a common household and not the right to parenthood.

Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for parenthood.

Article 5. Permits for parenthood shall be issued upon application by city, county, or State authorities to married couples , providing the parents are financially able to support the expected child, have the qualifications needed for proper rearing of the child, have no transmissible diseases, and on the woman’s part, no medical indication that maternity is likely to result in death or permanent injury to health.

Article 6No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.

While Sanger’s plan may have been viewed as extreme in her day, and the idea of coercion may have been chided as evoking a potential backlash against Planned Parenthood, my colleague, Kelli wisely observed that the “two-child idea” advocated by Guttmacher was just as eugenic. In a recent Live Action News report, Kelli noted that the, “[…] view of ‘two children and no more’ has its roots in the eugenics movement, and at the heart of the eugenics movement lies Planned Parenthood. Margaret Sanger and her friends advocated population control for the ‘unfit’, while today’s eugenicists tend to couch their beliefs about family size in terms of environmental concerns.

Despite that fact that Guttmacher and Sanger were both (as eugenicists) concerned that the world population was a threat, it was under Guttmacher’s leadership that Planned Parenthood first vocalized abortion as part of the answer to “over-population.”

He noted this approval in the 1970 interview where he stated:

If we could get the abortion law liberalized, most of the 750,000 unwanted pregnancies would not lead to babies – rejected children, battered baby syndrome and illegal abortions.

And, in that same year, Guttmacher admitted to a 1970 Cornell Symposium, (according to an April 7, 1970 article published by the Cedar Rapids Gazette), that although he did not know when life began, he believed that “unlimited abortion” was the only way to reduce population growth saying:

There is no question that the most effective way of reducing population growth is by unlimited abortion.

Today, Alan Guttmacher is painted by some as a hero of “reproductive rights” despite his promotion of coerced population control and abortion.  And, Guttmacher was correct about one thing, and that is that abortion has been an effective tool in the limitation of births. This was recently acknowledged by pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who said, “I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

It is no surprise that Guttmacher’s namesake institution, the Guttmacher Institute would later be referred to as a “research arm” and a “special affiliate” of Planned Parenthood.  After all, on their website, his Institute describes Guttmacher by saying, “No one was better able to unite the Planned Parenthood organization or summon it to carry out its historic mission.”

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Population control film produced by Walt Disney: children in large families ‘sickly and unhappy’

Posted in Bernard Berelson, Disney, Frederick OSborn, John D Rockefeller, Population Control, Population Council with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 25, 2017 by saynsumthn
screen shot from film

A newly discovered 1960’s video produced by Walt Disney Productions promotes “family planning” propaganda as a way to solve overpopulation and enter into the utopia that can only be attained by having smaller families.  The company known for animated cartoons was started in 1923 by Walt Disney and his brother Roy O. Disney.  In 1966, a year prior to the film’s release, Walt Disney died, leaving his brother Roy in charge.  The controversial film, entitled Family Planning was released in December of 1967 and produced in association with the Population Council, which advocates abortion.

Walt Disney Production produces FP film with Population Council

The Population Council is credited with bringing the abortion pill RU486 to the United States. The organization was founded in 1952 by John D. Rockefeller 3rd.

News Disney Family Planning film

Frederic Osborn, a founding member of the American Eugenics Society became the group’s second president in 1957. Osborn, who once wrote, “Eugenic goals are most likely attained under a name other than eugenics,” signed Margaret Sanger’s “Citizens Committee for Planned Parenthood” published in her Birth Control Review in April of 1938, as Live Action News has previously documented.

Some speculate that Planned Parenthood’s infamous slogan “Every Child a Wanted Child” may have originated with Osborn.

In 1969, Population Council’s president, Bernard Berelson, published an article suggesting that if voluntary methods of birth control were not successful, it may become necessary for the government to put a “fertility control agent” in the water supplies of “urban” neighborhoods.

The Population Council brags about their Disney collaboration on their website’s timeline noting the film has been translated into 25 languages.

Disney film Family Planning with Population Council

The propaganda film features Disney’s iconic animated character, Donald Duck who introduces the alleged gloom of having a large family. Children, in smaller sized families are “healthy and happy and go to school to gain an education,” the film states, as if, children of large families are unhealthy, unhappy, and uneducated.

The mother of a smaller sized family doesn’t “have to work too hard and stays healthy and happy,” producers of the film go on to claim.

The propaganda film begins by referring to the “Common Man” who “by nature” is “one of the animals.” It states:

But he has something the rest do not have, human intelligence and the ability to reason and plan ahead. Other animals are at the mercy of the world around them. But by his ability to reason man has learned to improve his life.

Donald Duck narrates Family Planning film

In what they call an “upward rise” of man, the film’s narrator claims that man is being held back by increased numbers:

But this upward rise is being slowed by the sheer weight of numbers. The family of man is increasing at an astonishing rate. Almost doubling every generation. Ironically, this too comes about through man’s intelligence.

The film takes a slight Malthusian look at population growth blaming the increase in population on medical advances.

“The number of people in the community remained about the same for many generations,” it says. “There was almost a balance. A balance between the large number of babies born each year and the large number of people who died.”

The film credits, disease, epidemics, and famine with the death of earlier generations, until,  “[…] in the space of a single generation, man began to change these conditions. There was great progress in medical science.”

Donald Duck family planning film

Adding, that now (in 1967):

There are still about the same number of babies being born each year but, today, deaths are cut in half, or better especially among children. The old balance is upset. Those who live now, instead of dying, are added each year to the number of people in the community.

The film indoctrinates its viewers that a “happy family” is one with a modest number of children while large families basically starve with “no money for modern conveniences. […] The mother will have too much to do. She’ll be tired and cross and her health will suffer. The children will be sickly and unhappy with little hope for the future.”

This was the attitude Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger once advocated when she suggested that parents get a license to parent.

License to Breed Margaret Sanger

In Sanger’s“A License for Mothers to Have Babies” with the subtitle, “A code to stop the overproduction of children,” she writes:

Permits for parenthood shall be issued upon application by city, county, or State authorities to married couples, providing the parents are financially able to support the expected child, have the qualifications needed for proper rearing of the child, have no transmissible diseases, and on the woman’s part, no medical indication that maternity is likely to result in death or permanent injury to health.

Sanger later told journalist Mike Wallace, “I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world — that have disease from their parents.”

In their January 1968 edition of the publication Studies in Family Planning, Population Council explained why they produced the film:

Throughout the world there is great need for more energetic programs of information and education on family planning. As we have deliberated about the problem, we have considered that one of the most familiar, most popular, and most effective materials for mass exposure is the animated cartoon; and certainly among the leading producers of this form is the Walt Disney organization. Accordingly, the Council authorized the Disney studios to prepare a short color cartoon, featuring Donald Duck, that deals with the desirability of family planning. In addition to the talent and reputation of the Disney studio in this field, the Disney style is familiar throughout the world and its identification with wholesome family life is well-known.

The film is called “Family Planning.” […] The film is designed primarily for men and women of reproductive age in the developing countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and we have reason to believe that it will be utilized in the United States as well.

The goal of the film is then laid out in the article:

The film will, we hope, help to develop attitudes favorable to the small family norm; […] stimulate discussion of the matter; and, importantly, help to legitimate the very concept and practice of family planning throughout the developing world.

PP Children by Choice Not Chance

To no one’s surprise, Disney’s film captured a version of Planned Parenthood’s oft repeated “every child a wanted child” slogan, mentioned previously as attributed to Osborn.

“This picture can be true for complex families if the number of children born is left to chance! ” the film says.

And the solution?

Today things have changed,” the film explains, “modern science has given us a key that makes possible a new kind of personal freedom – family planning!”

“Family Planning” is key according to Disney film

It’s pure bliss in Disney’s family planning world and there is no mention in the film about the complications of birth control, the unpredictability of pregnancy or the effectiveness of each family planning method.

Nor is there any mention of whether some “family planning” methods could be abortive.

Nope.

Just rainbows and unicorns and of course, Donald Duck and the promise of miraculous results because allegedly “[family planning] improves the health of mother and children” and, as the propaganda film claims, “both are better off if children are not born too close together.”

And, as a reward, for limiting your children you will have room for “modern conveniences.”

Disney Family Planning for Modern conveniences

The film ends with the concept that family planning will somehow usher in a utopia world which benefits all of society:

[…] if enough couples choose family planning the balance will be restored. But, this time in a better way. Thus, every couple has the opportunity to help build a better life not just for themselves but for people everywhere. And, all of us have a responsibility toward the family of man, including you.

The film is one of many efforts in the 1960’s and 70’s to indoctrinate the culture on the use of birth control. It was sold by Planned Parenthood in certain areas, but went out of production in 1988 because of decreasing demand, according to a report by the Population Research Institute.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger spoke to the Klan and supported eugenics. So why does the organization still honor her?

Posted in Eugenics, Eugenics in North Carolina, Margaret Sanger, Margaret Sanger and AES, Merge ABCL with Eugenics, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics, Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger Award, Planned Parenthood racist supporter with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 24, 2017 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger spoke to the Ku Klux Klan and supported eugenics. So why does the organization still honor her?

The media seems to be doing an effective job of condemning many people who have an association with the Klu Klux Klan — but one exception to this seems to be Planned Parenthood’s “beloved” founder, Margaret Sanger. Margaret Sanger is usually described as a “birth control pioneer” who founded Planned Parenthood, but she also met with members of the Klan, advocated eugenics, and supported the use of sterilization to rid the planet of the “unfit.” Sanger wrote about her meeting with the Klan in her autobiography. Yet somehow this fact is made light of, glossed over, or completely ignored by the media.

On page 366 of her autobiography, Sanger described her meeting with the Klan, where she says she received additional invitations to speak with similar groups:

I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…. I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…. I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…. In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.

What about Sanger’s outspoken support for eugenics?

While some may not be entirely familiar with the meaning of “eugenics,” it’s likely that those same people have seen it in action in various ways. Coined in the mid 1800’s by Francis Galton, the cousin of Charles Darwin, eugenics was a popular movement to create a society in which those who were considered “superior” would reproduce… while those who were deemed “inferior” would be encouraged not to reproduce. Tragically, this movement was credited with forcefully sterilizing many men and women. The targets of these horrendous acts were disproportionately Black and poor, according to many reports.

Screenshot of PP honoring Sanger

Eugenics victim Elaine Riddick speaks in the video below about being “cut up like a hog,” thanks to the philosophy of eugenics. Riddick, like some other Black citizens, was forcibly sterilized in North Carolina in 1968. Her tearful testimony encouraged state lawmakers to vote for reparations for those like her, who were eugenically sterilized.

So how does this relate to Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger? One of the prominent supporters of that horrific eugenics program was Clarence Gamble, and Gamble was a director of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League, which later changed its name to Planned Parenthood.

In Margaret Sanger’s “Birth Control and Racial Betterment,” the Planned Parenthood founder links the goals of eugenics with her own goals of promoting birth control, writing (emphasis added):

We who advocate Birth Control, on the other hand, lay all our emphasis upon stopping not only the reproduction of the unfit but upon stopping all reproduction when there is not economic means of providing proper care for those who are born in health. …While I personally believe in the sterilization of the feeble-minded, the insane and syphilitic, I have not been able to discover that these measures are more than superficial deterrents when applied to the constantly growing stream of the unfit… Eugenics without Birth Control seems to us a house builded upon the sands. It is at the mercy of the rising stream of the unfit….

Sanger called for unfit to be sent to farms (Image credit Maafa21)

Sanger was highly motivated to stop the procreation by those she deemed “unfit.” In a personal letter to Katharine Dexter McCormick in 1950, Sanger called for “a simple, cheap, safe contraceptive to be used in poverty stricken slums, jungles, and among the most ignorant people.”

But, Sanger added, “Even this will not be sufficient, because I believe that now, immediately, there should be national sterilization for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them.”

In 1932, Sanger also called for those who were poor (and those she considered to be “morons and immoral”) to be shipped to colonies where they would live in “Farms and Open Spaces” dedicated to brainwashing these so-called “inferior types” into having what Sanger called better “moral conduct.”  She specifically wanted to keep “immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race.” (“A Plan for Peace,” by Margaret Sanger, published in Birth Control Review (BCR) April 1932, pp. 107-108)

Sanger was more than just a passive observer where eugenics was concerned; she was a member of the American Eugenics Society and even tried to unite her efforts and her publication with the eugenics movement.

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger a member of the American Eugenics Society (image credit Maafa21)

This image below captures a letter entitled, “Shall the Birth Control Review be combined with a Eugenics Magazine?” written by Sanger.  It was published in the June 1928 edition of her Birth Control Review and it details her meeting (page 188) with American Eugenics Society representative, Leon Whitney, to merge her publication with that of the Eugenics Society. Whitney was the former Executive Secretary of the American Eugenics Society (AES) and Sanger published his writings in the Birth Control Review (BCR).

Of interest is that fact that, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was so influenced by Whitney that he sent him a letter complimenting him for a book he had written on sterilization.

Margaret Sanger to Merge ABCL with Eugenics

Sanger merge w eugenics

The New York Times recorded Sanger’s desire to unite with the eugenics movement as well, in an April 1, 1925, article:

Mrs. Margaret Sanger, founder of the American Birth Control League [ABCL], said that the league was ready to unite with the eugenic movement whenever the eugenists were able to present a definite program of standards for parenthood on a eugenic basis, rather than a eugenic ideal.

Another example where Sanger’s desire to unite with the eugenics movement can be seen is in this ABCL publication from 1935 (below), calling for a resolution that Sanger’s American Birth Control League (which later became Planned Parenthood), “unite with the American Eugenics Society.”

Sanger resolution to merge BCR with Eugenics

Sanger made certain that eugenics movers and shakers were deeply embedded in her organization, as Live Action News has previously documented. Below is a sample list of American Eugenics Society founders, leaders, and members who were a part of Margaret Sanger’s board or organizations:

American Eugenics Society members on Margaret Sanger's Board (image credit Maafa21)

American Eugenics Society members on Margaret Sanger’s Board (Image credit: Maafa21)

In addition to Sanger’s connections, Live Action News has documented that many of Planned Parenthood’s officials were members or leaders of the American Eugenics Society. (See a partial list here.)

PP’s Margaret Sanger Award

Since the 1960’s, Planned Parenthood has granted its infamous Margaret Sanger Award (calling it their top award) to people who benefit the organization’s cause.

Probably the most well-known recipient of the Margaret Sanger award in more recent times is Hillary Clinton, who said during her acceptance of the award that she “admired Margaret Sanger.” Republicans called her out for her comments, and Clinton responded by making disparaging remarks about Thomas Jefferson instead of repudiating Sanger’s push to eradicate the “unfit.” In the video below, Clinton pays homage to Sanger:

In 2014, then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi accepted the Margaret Sanger award, despite Sanger’s clear support for a hideous eugenic philosophy and associations with the Klan. Pelosi referred to the largest abortion corporation in the nation as an “outstanding organization,” suggesting that Sanger’s philosophy paved the ideology behind Planned Parenthood: “Out of this philosophy and outlook emerged the spirit and driving force of what would become known as the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.” Pelosi added, “To be associated with the great Margaret Sanger is a distinct privilege.”

Nancy Pelosi gets award named after Klan speaker, Margaret Sanger founder of Planned Parenthood

In 2004, the founder of CNN, Ted Turner, received the Margaret Sanger Award. The “honor” was mentioned in Planned Parenthood’s 2004 annual report:

2004 Margaret Sanger award to CNN Founder Ted Turner

Today, Planned Parenthood will defend their founder by pointing to civil rights giants like Martin Luther King, Jr., who also received the Margaret Sanger award. But the full picture and agenda of Sanger and her Planned Parenthood organization were not obvious to many in the Black community at that time, including MLK.

However, despite the suspicious timing of the award to MLK, many Black leaders have since spoken against the birth control and family planning agenda of Planned Parenthood, even calling abortion a form of “black genocide.”

Given this information and much more, when will the media demand recipients of this hideous award return it to Planned Parenthood? And, even more important, when will Congress cut ties with Planned Parenthood and stop sending them half a billion in tax dollars every year?

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Are Sanger’s eugenic efforts still a hallmark of Planned Parenthood’s mission?

Posted in Margaret Sanger and AES, Margaret Sanger on Segregation and sterilization, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics, Planned Parenthood Employee, Planned Parenthood Eugenics Connections with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 9, 2017 by saynsumthn

From Live Action News |

In celebrating their 100th birthday, Planned Parenthood supporters continue to praise their founder Margaret Sanger (even featuring her on their 100 year website) while simultaneously attempting to distance the organization from her eugenicist beliefs. The problem is that they continue to hold Sanger up as an icon, despite her support of one of the most demeaning ideologies of recent centuries.

planned-parenthood-100-years-features-margaret-sanger

In celebrating their 100 year anniversary, Planned Parenthood says (as pictured above) the organization “was founded on the revolutionary idea that women should have the information and care they need to live strong, healthy lives and fulfill their dreams.” But is this true? Was Planned Parenthood really founded on those ideas? Not quite.

Alexander Sanger (image credit IPPF)

Alexander Sanger (image credit IPPF)

In an interview with Vox, Margaret Sanger’s grandson Alexander Sanger, who is the current Chair of the International Planned Parenthood Council and a former president of Planned Parenthood New York City, tried to gloss over his grandmother’s beliefs by claiming that she only “dabbled in eugenics”:

Now, she also dabbled in eugenics. She was not a full believer in all of eugenics, and disagreed with some of the things eugenicists believe in. But at various points in her life, she was opposed to women who she felt were incapable of being mothers from becoming mothers.

How does being “opposed to women who she felt were incapable of being mothers from becoming mothers” square with the idea that women should have “information” and be able to “fulfill their dreams,” as is advertised on the website graphic above? What if those women dreamed of motherhood? And we are supposed to believe that Sanger was some sort of feminist icon?

If Margaret Sanger was “not a full believer in eugenics” as her grandson suggests, it wasn’t where the so-called “unfit” were concerned. The founder of Planned Parenthood clearly advocated eugenic solutions for that “class of people” she deemed unworthy to have children, even calling for a “license to breed” and the permanent sterilization of those she deemed “feebleminded.” If Sanger differed from rank and file eugenicists, it was that she also supported those she called “fit” to voluntarily limit their children. In her autobiography, Sanger wrote:

Eugenics, which had started long before my time, had once been defined as including free love and prevention of conception. Moses Harman of Chicago, one of its chief early adherents, had run a magazine and gone to jail for it under the Comstock regime. Recently it had cropped up again in the form of selective breeding, and biologists and geneticists such as Clarence C. Little, President of the University of Maine, and C. B. Davenport, Director of the Cold Spring Harbor Station for Experimental Evolution, had popularized their findings under this heading…. I accepted one branch of this philosophy, but eugenics without birth control seemed to me a house built upon sands.

The fact is that despite the claims of Planned Parenthood’s supporters, not only did Sanger have a strong belief in eugenics, she made certain eugenics movers and shakers were deeply embedded in her organization. Below is a sample list of American Eugenics Society founders, leaders or members who were a part of Margaret Sanger’s board or organizations:

American Eugenics Society members on Margaret Sanger's Board (image credit Maafa21)

American Eugenics Society members on Margaret Sanger’s Board (Image credit: Maafa21)

And here is Margaret Sanger herself, listed as a member of the American Eugenics Society. Hardly a “dabble,” as her grandson has suggested:

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger a member of the American Eugenics Society (image credit Maafa21)

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger a member of the American Eugenics Society (image credit Maafa21)

Margaret was such a strong believer in eugenics that she even attempted to merge her publication with the Eugenics Society (which again doesn’t sound like “dabbling” to me). An April 1, 1925, article in the New York Times documented Sanger’s intentions:

Mrs. Margaret Sanger founder of the American Birth Control League, said that the league was ready to unite with the eugenic movement whenever the eugenists were able to present a definite program of standards for parenthood on a eugenic basis rather than a eugenic ideal.

nyt1925merge-abcl-eugenics1

mergeabclwitheugenicsThis letter, written by Sanger in June of 1928 and published in her Birth Control Review under the heading, “Shall the Birth Control Review be combined with a Eugenics Magazine?” Sanger details her meeting with American Eugenics Society representative, Leon Whitney, to merge her publication with that of the Eugenics Society in order to “reach[] a wider audience and cover[] a more extended field.” Whitney was the former executive secretary of the American Eugenics Society and Sanger willingly published his writings in her Birth Control Review.

woman-and-the-new-race-eugenics-publishing-company-margaret-sanger2Some of Sanger’s writings, listed below, were even published by the eugenics movement (Source: Margaret Sanger, Pioneer of Birth Control, by Lawrence Lader and Milton Meltzer):

• What Every Mother Should Know, originally published by the Eugenics Publishing Co. in 1916
• What Every Girl Should Know, originally published by the Eugenics Publishing Co. in 1922

Planned Parenthood promoters try to convince the public that Sanger — a member of the American Eugenics Society who, by the way, also advocated for euthanasia — was simply a product of her day. But the facts paint a much different picture. Despite the evidence, Planned Parenthood’s supporters are working overtime to gloss over their founder’s beliefs.

Planned Parenthood Board Member Max Michael

Planned Parenthood Board Member Max Michael

In an op-ed praising abortion giant Planned Parenthood’s work as “health care equity,” Max Michael, MD, a member of the Planned Parenthood Southeast Board of Director, recently wrote:

Like many great organizations, Planned Parenthood is not without its flaws. While Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, was a woman of tremendous achievement, she was also a flawed and imperfect leader. She devoted her life to enabling women to have control over when and whether to have children, yet she also had beliefs, practices, and associations that Planned Parenthood acknowledges, denounces and works to redress.

Michael’s words coincidentally seem to mirror Planned Parenthood’s published talking points.

Planned Parenthood proudly calls Sanger a “reproductive rights trailblazer,” “woman of heroic accomplishments,” and “a true visionary,” while at the same time claiming to denounce her views, even giving Sanger a pass for speaking to the Klu Klux Klan, writing:

However, it is true that Margaret Sanger made a speech on birth control to a women’s auxiliary branch of the Ku Klux Klan in Silver Lake, New Jersey, in 1926. Sanger’s passion to spread and mainstream birth control led her to speak to any group interested in learning how to plan their reproduction. Planned Parenthood strongly disagrees with Sanger’s decision to address an organization that spreads hatred (Sanger, 1938, 366).

Planned Parenthood praises Margaret Sanger, 2008

Planned Parenthood praises Margaret Sanger, 2008

Planned Parenthood leaves out the fact that Sanger was encouraged by the results of her speech to the Klan, saying, “In the end, through simple illustrations I believe I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.”

As the public learns the truth about Sanger’s beliefs, they tend to become less supportive of Planned Parenthood’s mission. It is this reality that likely prompted an unusual response from a Planned Parenthood spokesperson in 2011, after a member of the Humanist Community Forum in California asked her how she would respond to statements that Margaret Sanger was “such a racist.”

Guadalupe Rodriguez, Director of Public Affairs for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte in Silicon Valley, Alameda and San Mateo Counties, answered (watch the exchange at 37:44):

What we say is that she did make these statements – they were wrong then and they’re wrong now. We’re not standing by anything that she said–we’re not standing by her beliefs. We are a vastly different organization now than we were when she first started the group. We’ve evolved…. What we say is her statements and her beliefs were wrong then and they’re wrong now and we don’t stand with her – we are a different organization.

Planned Parenthood has a strange way of “denouncing” and “disagreeing” and not “standing by” Sanger’s beliefs — they named their most prestigious award after her. Sadly, even though Sanger’s beliefs were despicable, many journalists and politicians alike have accepted the infamous Margaret Sanger Award without hesitation.

Planned Parenthood’s doublespeak regarding Sanger is troubling, to say the least. The organization has called her one of the “greatest heroines,” while simultaneously denouncing her eugenic efforts. Privately, they acknowledge that Sanger’s vision was the foundation of Planned Parenthood’s mission. A 2008 Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains annual report says of Sanger, “Sanger’s early efforts remain the hallmark of Planned Parenthood’s mission.”

 

Planned Parenthood’s ties to eugenics go far beyond Margaret Sanger

Posted in Eugenics, Eugenics Quarterly, Eugenics Review, Margaret Sanger, Margaret Sanger and AES, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 9, 2017 by saynsumthn

From Live Action News

One of the more frustrating things pro-lifers hear from abortion supporters is the claim that Planned Parenthood has never been about eugenics. It is simply intellectually dishonest as well as a total denial of history to make such a claim. Such was the case recently when MSNBC’s Joy Reid defended Planned Parenthood and cut off a guest who criticized Hillary Clinton because she once admitted that she admired Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger.

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger

According to author George Grant in his book Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood:

[Sanger] began to build the work of the American Birth Control League, and ultimately, of Planned Parenthood. Margaret relied heavily on the men, women, ideas, and resources of the Eugenics movement. Virtually all of the organization’s board members were Eugenicists. Financing for the early projects from the opening of the birth control clinics to the publishing of the revolutionary literature – came from Eugenicists. The speakers at the conferences, the authors of the literature and the providers of the services were almost without exception avid Eugenicists. And the international work of Planned Parenthood were originally housed in the offices of the Eugenics Society while the organizations themselves were institutionally intertwined for years.

Sanger was an avowed eugenicist and a member of the American Eugenics Society, and she also proudly spoke to the Ku Klux Klan, something she described in her autobiography…

I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered. (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger writes about her speech with the Klan

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger writes about her speech with the Klan

But, as abortion supporters who view Sanger as a heroine often do, they make the claim that Sanger is dead and therefore we are to simply ignore her Klan interactions, eugenics connections, rants about immigrants, push for forced sterilization and her failed goal of merging with the Eugenics Society.

Today, we are told that Sanger was a product of her day and that her attempt to have the “unfit” sterilized, the “feebleminded” shipped off, or her radical suggestion that couples be forced to get a permit from the state to have children (she wrote“No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for parenthood“) had no lasting impact on the organization she founded, namely, Planned Parenthood.

The fact is that despite the claims of their supporters, not only does Planned Parenthood have a connection to eugenics separate from their founder, but many of Planned Parenthood’s officials were members or leaders of the American Eugenics Society. The following is a very abbreviated list of examples:

Henry P. Fairchild was vice president of Planned Parenthood and (surprise!) he was also a past president of the American Eugenics Society. According to the American Sociological Association, “One of Fairchild’s most famous contributions was the development of the Planned Parenthood of America Federation, called the Birth Control Federation of America until 1942. There he served on the Board of Directors in 1932 and later the Vice President from 1939-1948.”

Samuel W. Anderson was a member of the American Eugenics Society and served on Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Board of Directors.

CP Blacker was Secretary to the Eugenics Society and Vice Chairman of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF).

Mrs. Dorothy Brush was involved with the American Eugenics Society as well as the International Planned Parenthood Federation. In 1948, The Brush Foundation provided seed money to help establish the International Committee on Planned Parenthood (ICPP). In 1952, the organization opened its headquarters in London, England.

C. Lalor Burdick was a member of the American Eugenics Society and served on the Board of Directors for Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and PPFA’s World Population Emergency Campaign.

Arkansas Eugenics Assoc. becomes state Planned Parenthood affiliate. (Image screen from Maafa21)

Arkansas Eugenics Society becomes state Planned Parenthood affiliate. (Image screen from Maafa21)

Mrs. Edward (Hilda) Cornish was not only a member of the American Eugenics Society, she was also an officer of the Arkansas Eugenics Association (later the Arkansas Eugenics Association, which would become the Arkansas State Affiliate of Planned Parenthood). Despite her direct connection to eugenics organizations, Cornish was named Arkansas Planned Parenthood’s executive director.

Robert L. Dickinson was a Vice President of Planned Parenthood and served on their Board of Directors. However, his eugenics ties were as deep as Sanger’s. In fact, he was a member of the American Eugenics Society as well as a committee chairman for Eugenics Research Associationevent.

Dr. Haven Emerson was on the Board of Directors for the American Eugenics Society and served as a Chairman of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Emerson was also a member of their National Medical Council.

In addition to those who officially served as leaders of Planned Parenthood who had direct ties to eugenics (too many to name here), there were others who were accepted with open arms despite their eugenics history.

Professor Frank Lorimer was part of the Eugenics Research Association and served on the editorial board of the Eugenics Quartlerly. Despite his eugenics connections, he represented the Planned Parenthood Federation of America at various meetings.

Dr. Charles F. Dight was the president of the Minnesota Eugenics Society when he wrote a letter to Adolf Hitler in 1933, wishing him success in “stamping out mental inferiority among the German people,” noting the Nazi leader’s efforts would “advance the eugenics movement in other nations as well as in Germany.”

In the 1930s, Dight joined the Minnesota Birth Control League, the forerunner of Planned Parenthood of Minnesota.

Charles F Dight letter to Hitler ( Image from document provided by the Minnesota Historical Society)

Charles F Dight letter to Hitler ( Image from document provided by the Minnesota Historical Society)

Frederic Osborn once wrote, “Eugenic goals are most likely attained under a name other than eugenics.” Osborn was a founding member of the American Eugenics Society who signed Margaret Sanger’s “Citizens Committee for Planned Parenthood,” published in her review in April of 1938. Some speculate that Planned Parenthood’s infamous slogan “Every Child a Wanted Child” may have originated with Osborn.

Planned Parenthood invites Eugenics officer to speak to their lunch

Planned Parenthood invites Eugenics officer to speak to their lunch

In 1958, Planned Parenthood was still cozy with eugenics leaders. In the article pictured right, we learn that the Director of the American Eugenics Society, Robert Carter Cook, was invited by Planned Parenthood to speak at their lunch in 1958.

In addition to Planned Parenthood leaders who had connections to eugenics, the International Committee on Planned Parenthood (ICPP) maintained by PPFA among others, received free rent from the Eugenics Society, according to the Eugenics Review. ICPP was replaced by the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) in 1952.

Does this sound like an organization that wanted to distance themselves from eugenics?

Wait… there’s more.

From their Review (and repeated here):

In conclusion, a unanimous vote of thanks was moved to the Eugenics Society, which has continued during the past year to make available, rent free, accommodation to the International Committee on Planned Parenthood.

This was confirmed by former Planned Parenthood chairman CP Blacker MD, who told an audience at the Fourth Conference at the International Planned Parenthood Federation in 1964, that while he was secretary of the Eugenics Society they gave Planned Parenthood office accommodations rent free.

Let’s stop and consider the intentional blindness to truth that Joy Reid and others would have to have to claim that Planned Parenthood is not a eugenic organization. The fact is that Planned Parenthood was so supportive of the evil eugenics ideology that they advertised in eugenics journals. For Reid and others who doubt this fact, I provide some examples below (notice that their goals and beliefs go far beyond “reproductive rights”):

1968:

1968 advertisement by Planned Parenthood in the Eugenics Review

1968 advertisement by Planned Parenthood in the Eugenics Review

The Eugenics Society’s honorary secretary even encouraged funding IPPF, saying, “The Society’s activities in crypto-eugenics should be pursued vigorously, and specifically that the Society should increase its monetary support of the FPA and the IPPF [International Planned Parenthood Federation]…”

1963:

1963 Advertisement from Planned Parenthood in the Eugenics Review Quarterly

1963 Advertisement from Planned Parenthood in the Eugenics Review Quarterly

1961:

1961 advertisement from Planned Parenthood in the Eugenics Review

1961 advertisement from Planned Parenthood in the Eugenics Review

In summary, it is evident that from its inception, Sanger founded and nurtured Planned Parenthood in eugenics — and denying what is plain to see will never change that fact.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.