Archive for population growth

The population control advocate behind Planned Parenthood’s transition to abortion

Posted in Abortion History, Alan F. Guttmacher, Forced Population Control, Forced Sterilization, Guttmacher, Illegal abortion, Lader, Planned Parenthood History with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 19, 2018 by saynsumthn

Alan Guttmacher, abortion, Planned Parenthood

This article is part two in a series on the history of Planned Parenthood. Read part one here.

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s focus was eugenic sterilization and birth control, rather than decriminalizing abortion. But it wasn’t a female eugenics crusader who rolled out the abortion agenda of Planned Parenthood — that came from Dr. Alan F. Guttmacher, a physician and past vice-president of the American Eugenics Society who was already steeped in abortion prior to his election as president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) in 1962. Guttmacher worked with Mary S. Calderone, who joined Planned Parenthood’s staff in 1953 as its medical director, a post she held until 1964. Years earlier, Guttmacher had vowed to work to decriminalize abortion, eventually persuading the PPFA board to commit the procedures.

Image: Alan F Guttmacher

PPFA president Alan F Guttmacher speaks about abortion, 1965

Planned Parenthood was initially reluctant to perform abortions — that is, until Guttmacher came on the scene. Before making millions committing abortions, Planned Parenthood admitted that abortion takes human life. A Planned Parenthood pamphlet from 1952 reads, “Abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.”

Another pamphlet from Planned Parenthood Federation of America also describes abortion as a procedure that “kills life after it has begun” and one which is “dangerous” to a woman’s “life and health.”

In the early 1960s, abortion enthusiasts like Larry Lader bemoaned Planned Parenthood’s lack of involvement with abortion, noting in his book, “Abortion II,” that “Abortion never became a feminist plank in the United States among the suffragettes or depression radicals. It was ignored, even boycotted by Planned Parenthood women in those days.”

Lader notes in his book, “Ideas Triumphant” how, other than the National Organization for Women (NOW), few groups were willing to support abortion: “In medicine, only the American Public Health Association (APHA) had taken a stand…. The huge network of Planned Parenthood Federation clinics remained on the sidelines except for its outspoken medical committee under Dr. Alan Guttmacher.”

Image: Lawrence Lader

Lawrence Lader, abortion crusader

Lader expounds further in his book, “Abortion II,” writing, “Planned Parenthood, with hundreds of chapters and clinics throughout the country, had been a particular disappointment. Legalized abortion, I insisted from the start, was the logical measure for contraception and an essential form of birth control. Under the leadership of Dr. Alan Guttmacher, the medical committee of Planned Parenthood-World Population proposed the ‘abolition of existing statutes and criminal laws regarding abortion’ in 1968. After this plank was approved by the members in 1969, Planned Parenthood chapters soon started abortion referrals, and even clinics, as an ‘integral part of medical care.’”

Guttmacher was an avid eugenicist, who joined others of his day in voicing a concern about rising population growth.  In spite of national calls for coercion to slow down the rate of population growth, Guttmacher instead advocated the decriminalization of abortion as an effort that he felt would accomplish the same result. But, although Guttmacher had learned how to finesse the rhetoric, he did not discount the use of coercion altogether. In 1966, Guttmacher compared the world population with the threat of nuclear war, telling the Washington Post that governments may have to act officially to limit families. “It may be taken out of the voluntary category,” Guttmacher said.

Image: article Guttmacher abortion coercion possible

Guttmacher abortion coercion possible

Population concerns drove public policy

In Michael W. Perry’s compilation of one of Sanger’s works with others of her period, “The Pivot of Civilization in Historical Perspective: The Birth Control Classic,” Perry writes of Alan Guttmacher, “In 1962, Alan Guttmacher, former vice president of the American Eugenics Association, assumed the presidency of Planned Parenthood. Soon, a ‘population bomb’ hysteria… was driving public policy. In 1969, a medical news magazine revealed what was really going on when it quoted Guttmacher, warning that if ‘voluntary means’ did not achieve the desired goals, ‘Each country will have to decide its own form of coercion and determine when and how it should be employed. At present, the means available are compulsory sterilization and compulsory abortion.’”

“That’s what [Margaret] Sanger intended to do with birth control…. So, why should it be surprising that Guttmacher felt the same?” Perry added.

 

This 1968 interview with Alan Guttmacher and a member of the clergy, which, according to Ball State University,  originated from WLBC-TV and was (possibly) a part of a segment titled, “Week in Review,” demonstrates the concern the PPFA president had about the so-called “population crisis.” Guttmacher began the interview by defining Planned Parenthood as a “movement which tries to make each child a wanted child born to responsible parents….”

In the interview, Alan Guttmacher, addressed the issue of population growth:

“Now, I think everyone is conscious of the fact that in some areas of the world there is explosive type of population increase, unsupportable, in that it is outdistancing food, it retards economic development… and, what we are attempting to do, of course, is to encourage countries to curtail the rate of growth.”

https://youtu.be/G1pwA6onfR0

He added this about the threat of a global “population crisis:”

Now, I’ve been in this a really long time and I am encouraged because, we have governments becoming deeply involved. Each year, one or more – many governments make population control part of national policy.

In 1969, after seeking government funding for “family planning” specifically for “low income Americans,” Guttmacher responded to criticism from some that population growth could be reduced by “voluntary methods” rather than government coercion. “I do not share their despair,” he stated. “The appropriate response, in my view, is to mobilize rapidly a total, coordinated U.S. program by government, in collaboration with voluntary health services, in an all-out maximum effort to demonstrate what voluntary fertility control can accomplish in a free society.”

A year later, in 1970, Guttmacher, told Boston Magazine that the United Nations should be the organization the United States used to carry out population control programs worldwide. Guttmacher explained his reasoning:

If you’re going to curb population, it’s extremely important not to have it done by the dammed Yankees, but by the UN. Because the thing is, then it’s not considered genocide. If the United States goes to the black man or the yellow man and says slow down your reproduction rate, we’re immediately suspected of having ulterior motives to keep the white man dominant in the world. If you can send in a colorful UN force, you’ve got much better leverage.

The fact is that Guttmacher understood that coercive means of population control would not be well received, especially by members of the Black community. The eugenics movement, of which he was a part, had come under criticism after the Nazis’ implemented their eugenic “final solution” for a “pure race” — something many believe originated with American eugenics leaders.

“So even though the plan [of coercion] 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 Lee McCall, a reporter for the Sarasota Herald Tribune in 1966.

Image: article Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

The push for taxpayer-funded birth control for the poor and minorities

Guttmacher, who also founded Planned Parenthood’s research arm and “special affiliate,” the Guttmacher Institute, then proposed a blueprint to force taxpayers to pay for birth control access for the poor, as Live Action News detailed previously.

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 at that time. So, 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.”

Image from 1940’s Birth control pamphlet published by Planned Parenthood

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.”

Guttmacher and Sanger were both (as eugenicists) concerned that the world population was a threat, but, Guttmacher, much savvier than Sanger, chose to couch his agenda as a “right.” He even told the paper that they were not trying to take away anyone’s rights, but trying to “show ghetto families how to space their children and avoid having children they don’t want.”

“Admittedly Guttmacher is buying time,” writes the New York Times in that 1969 report. “He thinks the voluntary movement should set a deadline of 1980. If world population growth has not dropped below 1.5 percent by then, he says, ‘we’ll have to get tough.’”

Guttmacher on coercive population control New York Times

Whatever Guttmacher meant by getting “tough” never materialized, because he believed decriminalizing abortion was the solution and noted this in a 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.

Proposing the availability of “unlimited abortion” to curb population growth

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.”

According to researcher and author Mary Meehan, “Guttmacher undoubtedly believed that [abortion] helped women; in fact, he had referred patients to an illegal abortionist as early as 1941. Yet he also had other motives, indicated by his service as vice president and board member of the American Eugenics Society.”

Omage: book The Case for Legalized Abortion Now, edited by Alan F Guttmacher

The Case for Legalized Abortion Now, edited by Alan F Guttmacher

In 1967, Guttmacher edited a book on legalizing abortion, where he admitted, “Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal illness such as cancer or leukemia, and, if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save, life.” Former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino agrees with this, stating that there is never a valid medical reason for abortion:

Guttmacher became Chief of Obstetrics at Baltimore’s Sinai Hospital in 1942, eventually creating a staff committee of five to make decisions about abortion. Like Sanger, Guttmacher allegedly watched a woman die from an illegal abortion while serving as an intern in Baltimore. He later wrote of other women, “In a short period I witnessed three deaths from illegal abortions: a 16-year old with a multiperforated uterus, a mother of four who died of sepsis rejecting another child, and a patient in early menopause who fatally misinterpreted amenorrhea.”

Image: Alan Guttmacher 1973 (Image credit: WGBH)

Alan Guttmacher 1973 (Image credit: WGBH)

For years, Guttmacher referred women to physicians for illegal abortion procedures. He once wrotehow an illegal abortionist, nicknamed Dr. T,  showed him the abortion technique. “His technique was to pack one inch gauze strips into the cervix and lower uterine segment the night before he was to evacuate the conceptus,” Guttmacher wrote. “After 12 hours of packing, the cervix was wide open, and he was able to empty the uterus with an ovum forceps, followed by currettage without anesthesia. In advanced pregnancies he inserted intrauterine bougies, held in place by a vaginal pack until strong contractions commenced, which not infrequently took several days.”

“These early medical experiences with the unavailability of abortions in reputable hospitals and the incidence of illegal abortions convinced me that permitting abortion only ‘to preserve the life of the mother’ was undesirable and unenforceable…. My sentiment was that as long as the law was as restrictive as it was, doctors should not breach it, but work to change the law – a position which I forthrightly espoused in the classroom,” Guttmacher stated.

Dr. T later attended a 1950’s Abortion in the United States conference sponsored by PPFA, which focused on abortion. PPFA leader Mary Calderone writes, “Those very concerned with the problem of abortion will be full of gratitude for this report; gratitude to the P.P.F.A. for convening the conference and for the frankness of the thirty-eight participants, who comprised eminent gynaecologists, psychiatrists and a few social workers. The highlight of the proceedings was an M.D.’s testimony as a convicted (but not imprisoned) abortionist. The chairman stated that Dr. T. was his valued friend, known for nearly three decades, and described him as ‘an extremely competent abortionist … who some years ago fell into disagreement with the law and is no longer in practice”.’”

The PPFA group heard from abortion advocates worldwide, and in the end, Calderone indicates that there was no clarion call to push for abortion reform.

In his book, “Babies by Choice or by Chance,” published in 1959, Guttmacher allegedly deplored “the performance of abortion on virtual demand.” But Guttmacher also noted how he had learned from experience how hospitals were “allowed to interpret and administer the abortion law of their respective states without supervision or interference from either the police, the courts or medical agencies.”

Babies by Choice or By Chance, by Alan F Guttmcher

In 1952, Guttmacher had relocated from Baltimore to New York, where he became the first Director of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Mount Sinai Hospital, which had already been approving and performing abortions. “I was told that if a private patient was denied abortion in another institution, she frequently sought abortion at Mt. Sinai because of its well-known, relatively liberal policy,” Guttmacher claimed.

Alan Guttmacher appointed head of obstetrics at Mount Sinai Hospital (Image New York Times June 27,1952)

By 1962, Guttmacher was at the helm of Planned Parenthood and he was positioned to put his dream of decriminalizing abortion into action. That same year, as chairman of the medical and scientific committee of the Human Betterment Foundation, Guttmacher called the existing abortion laws “archaic” and “idiotic.”

Guttmacher named president of Planned Parenthood, 1967 (Image: New York Times)

“The idea that the fetus has a sacred right to survive from the moment of fertilization is a Judeo Christian creation,” he said according to a May 2, 1962, Poughkeepsie Miscellany News report.

Alan Guttmacher calls 1960 abortion laws archaic

“I believe that a new abortion statute for New York and each of the other states is needed…. I think it is high time that a commission of physicians, lawyers, judges, sociologists, and religionists convened in an attempt to wrestle with the problem realistically…. The only way progress can be made is through an aroused citizenry. What we need in the United States is a uniform abortion law,” Guttmacher wrote in “Babies by Choice.”

A few years later, during a 1965 “Abortion and the Law” BBC program, Guttmacher, then president of PPFA, put forth the infamous “health” exception for abortion, stating (36:20):

Now, the law as you know is simply to preserve the life of the mother. This is wholly inadequate.

Number one, I’d preserve the life or health of the mother. And, as you know, health could be interpreted quite broadly and I think it should be. In 1960, the World Health Organization gave us splendid definition of health. They said health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well being. Not simply the absence of illness and disease.

Second, I feel that abortion should be done, when competent medical opinion feels that there’s strong likelihood of the current [inaudible] to result in the malformed or abnormal child. I think whenever pregnancy is the result of proved rape, incest, or the impregnation of a child of sixteen or less, with or without the consent, that we have legal grounds for interrupting this pregnancy.

Interestingly, this language comes directly from the 1959 American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code on abortion. In our next report in this series, we will learn Guttmacher’s connection to that organization and detail what led up to Planned Parenthood’s decision to push for the decriminalization of abortion and begin referring for the procedure.

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

This was part two in Live Action News’ series on the history of Planned Parenthood’s move to committing abortions. You can read part one ,(1)  part three, and part four in additional articles. 

Alarmist Population Bomb author suggests cannibalism as possibility to “overpopulation”

Posted in Ehrlich, Zombie with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 23, 2014 by saynsumthn

Paul Ehrlich a radically pro-abortion population control professor of “Ethics” from Stanford has claimed overpopulation could lead to humanity having to eat the bodies of the dead.

We will soon be asking is it perfectly okay to eat the bodies of your dead because we’re all so hungry?,‘ he told HuffPost live host Josh Zepps.

Paul Ehrlich Huffpo

Ehrlich tells Zepps that “Ethics is hardly discussed in our media…How much do we really care about future generations…

Zepps asked Ehrlich what he would do if he were “Emperor of the World.”

Ehrlich replies, “The first thing I would do is make every possible move to give women full equal rights and opportunities. And give every sexually active person complete access to modern contraception and where necessary, backed up abortion…”

Ehrlich says that current population trends are on a course that could leave cannibalism as one of the only options.

Ehrlich claimed that scarcity of resources will get so bad that humans will need to drastically change our eating habits and agriculture.

He added that humanity is ‘moving in that direction with a ridiculous speed.

‘In other words between now and 45 years from now, 2.5 billion people will be added to the planet.

‘We are moving towards resource wars.

population-bomb

Ehrlich is widely known for his 1968 publication of ‘The Population Bomb’ which called for ‘population control’ to prevent global crises from overpopulation.

But Ehrlich has been predicting this gloom and doom for years:

Ehrlich PP

‘In the 1970’s the world will undergo famines – hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death,’ he predicted.

‘our children will inherit a totally different world, a world in which the standards, politics, and economics of the 1960’s are dead.’

His solution- Population Control….abortion…sterilization….and yes….infanticide..

The author of the 1972 book the Population bomb has told Raw Story that giving people the right to have as many children as they want is “a bad idea.”

Giving people the right to have as many people as many children that they want is, I think, a bad idea,” Ehrlich told Raw Story. “It’s not giving people the right to have as many children as they want, it’s giving people the right to control their reproduction so that they don’t have so many children that their children’s and grandchildren’s lives are in danger.”

“Nobody, in my view, has the right to have 12 children or even three unless the second pregnancy is twins,” Ehrlich continued. “That may be a hard-nosed view, but if you look at the entire situation, it’s crystal clear if we keep the populations of the rich growing, then the poor aren’t going to have a chance, and eventually, the descendants of the rich aren’t going to have a chance either.

Paul Ehrlich May 2014

In a recent speech at Macquarie University he said, “For example, having a kid is one thing. If you add a second kid or you have the choice of adding a second kid or buying four hummers, you’re doing much more environmental damage by having the second kid than buying four hummers. Because, of course, besides all the consumption that that child is going to have – the hummers don’t reproduce.”

Hope on Eath Paul Ehrlich

Paul R. Ehrlich has authored another book with Michael Charles Tobias. In Hope on Earth both Ehrlich and Tobias argue that we are on the verge of environmental catastrophe, as the human population continues to grow without restraint and without significant attempts to deal with overconsumption and the vast depletion of resources and climate problems it creates. They both believe that the impact of a human society on its environment is the direct result of its population size, and through their dialogue they break down the complex social problems that are wrapped up in this idea and attempts to overcome it, hitting firmly upon many controversial topics such as circumcision, religion, reproduction, abortion, animal rights, diet, and gun control.

Chemicals water tweet

A Tweet placed on Huffpo’s feed reads, “Just put chemicals in the water so that us men can’t reproduce. BAM problem solved.”

To that tweeter I say your suggestion is an old idea that has been proposed many times- read here.

Guatemala study part of a larger attempt to limit population growth of minorities ?

Posted in Eugenics, Hispanic, John C. Cutler, Life Dynamics, Maafa21, Margaret Sanger, Mark Crutcher, Planned Parenthood, Planned Parenthood and Hispanics, Population Control, pro-choice, Racism with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 12, 2010 by saynsumthn

U.S.-led STD experiments come to light
Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow – 10/12/2010 3:35:00 AM

The United States is apologizing for intentionally infecting Guatemalan citizens, including institutionalized mental patients, with gonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or permission.

That experiment took place over 60 years ago, and about one-third of those infected never received adequate treatment. Moreover, they were even asked to pass the diseases on to others. Infected prostitutes were sent to the National Mental Health Hospital.

Life Dynamics president Mark Crutcher decides this exhibits an obvious ethics problem.

“Well, I think that’s part of a phenomenon that we’ve identified in our DVD, Maafa 21, in which a cadre of ultra-wealthy elitists in this world are using things like abortion, and in this case medical experimentation, to do away with…populations of people they don’t think have a right to live,” Crutcher explains.

He finds it interesting that “these people” always claim disinterest with genocide and maintain that that is not their interest or intent, but “every time one of these things is uncovered, you never see it being done on wealthy white people; it’s always minorities — people that they feel are inferior.”

The circumstances in the Guatemala case are comparable to the Tuskegee experiment in Alabama, in which hundreds of black men were told they were being treated for syphilis, when treatment was actually being withheld. The Guatemala experiments, conducted between 1946 and 1948, never provided useful information and were hidden for years.

Maafa 21 is a documentary that establishes the link between the eugenics movement and Planned Parenthood, which aims to reduce or eliminate minority population groups.

READ: Eliese Cutler wife to John C. Cutler of Guatemala syphilis study was a former Planned Parenthood board member founded in eugenics

Royal Society to “study” population growth – can you say “Eugenics”?

Posted in Eugenics, Population Control with tags , , , , , , , , on July 13, 2010 by saynsumthn

This report by the BBC has all the buzz words, but there is one sentence snuggled natly toward the bottom that explains it all. In my opinion, the results have already been decided and this announcement of a so-called “Study” is a formality to conclude that MORE “family planning” style eugenic population control is needed in the world. And just who will decide who is worthy of birth? The Elites , of course !

Watch this film ( Trailer below) called Maafa21 and see how this is NOT the fist time we have been down this eugenic trail :

Global population study launched by Royal Society
, Monday, 12 July 2010 03:21 UK

The human population is far higher than any other primate at any time in history

The UK’s Royal Society is launching a major study into human population growth and how it may affect social and economic development in coming decades.
The world’s population has risen from two billion in 1930 to 6.8 billion now, with nine billion projected by 2050.

The society acknowledges it is delving into a hugely controversial area, but says a comprehensive and scientific review of the evidence is needed.
It is led by Nobel laureate Sir John Sulston of Human Genome Project fame.

It is likely to have a greater impact on the future of humanity than some of the other issues we talk a lot about
Jonathon Porritt Forum for the Future Earth is too crowded for Utopia

“This is a topic that has gone to and fro in the last few decades, and appears to be moving back up the political agenda now,” he told BBC News.

“So it seems a good moment for the Royal Society to launch a study that looks objectively at the scientific basis for changes in population, for the different regional and cultural factors that may affect that, and at the effects that population changes will have on our future in term of sustainable development.”

The burgeoning human population is acknowledged as one of the underlying causes of environmental issues such as climate change, deforestation, depletion of water resources and loss of biodiversity.

The working group includes experts on the environment, agriculture, economics, law and theology drawn from a mix of rich and poor countries including the UK, China, Brazil and the US.

Green growth

In the 1970s, with disastrous food shortages routine in regions of Asia and Africa, the world’s apparently dwindling capacity to feed its rapidly growing population was an issue high on the political agenda.

New crops developed during the Green Revolution and other advances in agriculture, combined with economic progress, seemed to allay these fears in subsequent decades.

In addition, some people in developing countries argued that western nations raised the issue as a means of distracting attention from the rising and unsustainable consumption in the west.

Population growth is an often unspoken driver of trends such as deforestation

Recently, however, population has started to re-emerge as an issue of discussion among people working on environment and development issues.
High-profile champions such as Sir David Attenborough have spoken of its importance and the threats it may pose.

However, some economists and policymakers consider population growth a good thing, as it produces a swelling workforce capable of producing more goods and continued economic growth.

Jonathon Porritt, founder and director of the UK think tank Forum for the Future and a member of the Royal Society’s working group, suggested the review could shed some objective light on the issues under dispute.

“What it can do is shed some light on the different interpretations that people draw from the underlying trends,” he said.

“Why do some people say it doesn’t matter and is all welcome, while others such as me say it is likely to have a greater impact on the future of humanity than some of the other issues we are talking a lot about?”

Policymakers needed such objective studies, he said, in order to make effective choices – for example, deciding whether and how to support family planning policies in the developing world. ****BING BING BING – And there it is – the real reason !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Royal Society’s study is launched on World Population Day, and is expected to conclude in early 2012.

The Roots of Demographic Winter and the Global Economic Crisis

Posted in Abortion, Economy, Planned Parenthood, Population Control with tags , , , , , , , on June 30, 2010 by saynsumthn

Vodpod videos no longer available.

The Roots of Demographic Winter and the Global …, posted with vodpod

“The Roots of Demographic Winter and the Global Economic Crisis”

Demographic Winter didn’t happen in a vacuum. Bad ideas and misguided policies have led to rapidly declining birthrates worldwide.

Don Feder was a Boston Herald editorial writer and syndicated columnist from 1983 to 2002. Feder’s column was syndicated by Creator’s Syndicate in Los Angeles, and was carried by more than 40 newspapers and e-magazines nationwide. His writings have appeared in USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Weekly Standard, National Review, American Enterprise, Readers Digest, Front Page Magazine, Insight and Human Events. Feder is the 1998 recipient of the International Communications Award of the Republic of China on Taiwan and the 1993 winner of the Amy Foundation Writing Awards. He has appeared on network and syndicated radio and television shows. Feder is a graduate of Boston University and Boston University Law School. He runs a media/political consulting firm–Don Feder Associates and is the Communications Director for the World Congress of Families.

“Family Planning for all” – UN Pushes Eugenics and Population Control on Poor Black Countries

Posted in Abortion, African Nations, Black Genocide, Black Neighborhood, Black Victims, Black Women, Maafa21, Population Control, Racism with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on April 25, 2010 by saynsumthn

Read Carefully ! This was printed in July of 2009 and NOW there is a PUSH to legalize abortions in Kenya. The Pop Control freaks want less African people in the world !

POPULATION: Poorest Countries to Bear Brunt of Growth
By Ben Case

UNITED NATIONS, Jul 8 (IPS) – The world’s population – already at least 6.7 billion people – will double in the next 40 years if current growth rates are left unchecked, warns the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

The effects of overpopulation are being felt across the globe, but the fastest growing regions are also some of the poorest. Sub-Saharan Africa has the most rapid overall growth, exacerbating existing problems like famine, disease and violent conflict over resources.

“What we see is countries like Kenya, which had stabilised its growth, are now growing faster again,” Alex Ezeh, executive director of the Africa Population and Health Research Centre, told IPS. “By 2050 Kenya is projected to have 87 million people.”

Kenya currently has a population of 39 million.

The countries with the fastest individual growth rates also have marked concentrations of urban poor populations, such as India, Pakistan, Nigeria and Indonesia.

We are looking at tens of millions more mouths to feed, children to school, and people to house in the countries that are least able to accommodate that,” Ezeh said.

While fertility rates overall have fallen in every region in the past 30 years, they have fallen the slowest in Africa.

A week ahead of the 20th anniversary of World Population Day on July 11, UNFPA sponsored a three-day conference on access to family planning in developing countries.

Thirty experts in the field convened to discuss improving access to contraceptives and services to the world’s poor. Family planning methods include birth control, emergency contraception, abortion, abstinence and sexual and reproductive health education.

UNFPA says family planning programmes are vital to boost women’s economic and social well-being, especially during the current global economic crisis, and to reduce endemic poverty and high rates of maternal and infant death.

Despite the agreement of 179 countries on the importance of family planning at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in 1994, the funding for family planning programmes targeted at the poor has stagnated over the past 15 years.

Some participants even suggested the ICPD agreement served as a false indicator of actual progress, providing justification for countries to pull resources from family planning programmes under the pretext of progress, thereby allowing the problem to fester.

“Because of the momentum of growth that has been created because of the past high levels of fertility we have seen since the ICPD, the people that will drive the population growth over the next 50 years are already alive today, they have been born,” said Ezeh. “Now there needs to be a real sense of urgency.”

If we introduce effective family planning programmes now, we are able to actually forestall the continuing high rates of population growth 15, 20, 30 years from now,” he went on.

“So the more we look at it and ask questions like ‘oh, should we promote condoms?’ or ‘should we involve adolescents?’ the worse situation is getting,” he said. But curbing population growth was far from the only goal of the UNFPA conference.

Family planning is important because it has been shown with absolutely no doubt to empower women,” Fatima Mrisho of the Tanzania Commission for AIDS, who attended the conference, told IPS.

“It gives women more opportunities for development, it makes herself as an individual survive better, it makes her children survive better, but as importantly, it also improves the general condition of a country,” she stressed.

Worldwide, over 500,000 women die every year during pregnancy and childbirth, many of them from preventable or treatable medical problems. And for every death, another 20 women suffer lifelong injuries and disabilities.

Maternal mortality rates in Africa are at least 100 times those in developed countries.

The conference cited the HIV/AIDS pandemic as another important factor in family planning needs. Both family planning and HIV/AIDS programmes seek increased sexual and reproductive health education and condom distribution to primarily young and poor populations.

“HIV has been a curse, but I think one positive aspect about it is the fact that is has to a large extent de-mystified the issues of sex and opened up and allowed sex and sexuality issues to come to the table much more,” Mrisho told IPS.

Family planning is not only important for less developed countries but for marginalised communities within countries as well.

Indigenous populations have some of the most acute needs of family planning programmes, and also have the least access to it.

“Physicians believe that indigenous women do not want to plan their families because they do not understand the language, they do not understand the culture,” said Nadine Gasman, who heads UNFPA in Guatemala. “But when you ask these women, they want.”

Indigenous people still make up a large population in many parts of the world, particularly Latin America. According to UNFPA, more than half of indigenous girls have a pregnancy before age 20.

There is a high demand for family planning services, but also a lack of culturally appropriate family planning education materials and services in indigenous areas.

“We need to do our homework because indigenous women have specific beliefs and needs and these need to be taken into account,” said Gasman.

“One Quechuan women told me there is a set number of babies in your body when you are born and using contraceptives will kill those babies. What we must understand is people with these beliefs can be very intelligent and even educated,” she explained.

“We need to take anthropology into account. There is no recipe or magic bullet, but family planning can fit into their world view, and there is a real demand.”

Much of the conference focused on providing clear, abundant and accurate information to communities that are difficult to reach so that women can make informed decisions for themselves.

Another common theme was the struggle to involve men in family planning programmes.

Many family planning programmes are work-based, inadvertently targeting men since men make up a large percentage of the formal workforce in many countries. Yet men make up the vast minority of active participants in those programmes worldwide.

The challenge is appealing to men and increasing the understanding that family planning is not a women’s issue but is relevant to men as well.

“Sports,” Mrisho said with a smile. “Sports that attract young, old, usually men but also women. And increasingly we have effective examples of using sports, particularly football in Africa, to try to link men with sexual reproductive health programmes.”

“The world needs to know that family planning is alive and kicking and is ready for expansion for services for young people for older people for women of reproductive ages, for married, for unmarried, for people in prisons, for people in offices,” she went on.

“I wish I could say family planning for all by the end of the next five years,” Mrisho said.

NOW Learn the truth about why they TARGET African, Kenya, Haiti, Latin America, and poor African nations for family planning, eugenics, and population control in a powerful documentary called: Maafa21 Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Preview below)