population growth and the american future (extremist prolife propaganda)

7/31/2019 Population Growth and the American Future (Extremist Prolife Propaganda)

1/63

APRO-LIFE

REPORTon

Growth

and theAmerican

Future

by Randy Engel


2/63

Randy Engel is

Demographic Advisor for

WOMEN CONCERNED FOR THE UNBORN CHILD;4

Columnist for PENNSYLVANIANS FOR HUMAN LIFE;

Execut iv e Di rector

NATIONAL VIET NAM REFUGEE SERVICES;

Member of MAP

MORE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION

Member of P A A

The Population Associat ion of America

Ran dy E ngel , 1 9722nd edition


3/63

For behold , days are coming in

which men wil l say "Blessed are thebarren, and the wombs that never bore,

a n d b re a s t s t h a t n e v e r n u rs e d

LUKE 23:29


4/63

I NTRODUCTI ON

The Purpose and Conten t o f t h is Study

On July 18, 1969, Pres ident Richard Nixon, in a pres ident ia lmessage on popula t ion, proposed the c rea t ion by Congress of aCommiss ion on Popula t ion Growth and the American Future tos t u d y , s p o n s o r r e s e a r c h , a n d f o r m u l a t e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s

"regarding a broad range of problems associated with populationgrowth an d th e i r imp l ica t ions for America ' s futu re ."

On Ma rc h 16 , 1970 , by a n a c t o f Congre s s , t he Com m i s s i onwas official ly established and i ts mandate clearly set forth in thefollowing sp ecific are as:

First , the probable course of population growth, internal migra-t i on a nd r e l a t e d de m ogra ph i c de ve l opm e nt s be t we e n now a ndthe year 2000.

Se c ond l y , t he r e s ourc e s i n t he pub l i c s e c t o r o f t he e c onom ythat will be required to deal with the anticipated growth in popula-t ion.

T h i rd l y, wa ys i n whi c h popu l a t i on g rowt h m a y a ff e ct t he

ac t ivi t ies of Federa l , s t a t e an d loca l governm ent .

and Finally, a full hearing on th e moral an d eth ical values relatedto any p opu la t ion cont rol pol ic ies .*

*Amendm ent by Hous e Governmen tOpera t ions Comm it tee .

iii


5/63

The Commiss ion on Popula t ion Growth and the American Fu ture , headedby J ohn Rockefe lle r II I, wi ll soon su bm i t it s repor t to the Pres iden t , toeach House of Congress and to the American people, containing a com-prehensive descr ipt ion of i t s ac t ivi t i es and any recommendat ions i t pro-poses as a result of such activit ies.

In anticipation of the Commission's final report and recommendations,Women Concerned for the Unborn Chi ld and Pennsylvanians for HumanLife have invited me to prepare a pro-l ife summary of demographic trends

in the Uni ted Sta tes and an in-depth ana lys i s of the Commiss ion i t se l f ,and its projected findings and recommendations relating to future Americanpopulation policies.

This report i s based upon an or igina l paper , ent i t l ed Population Con-

trol-The Human Dimens ion, s ubm i t t e d t o t he Com m i s s i on on Fe brua ry18 , 1972 . W i t h t he a i d o f a w i de s e gm e nt o f t he p ro - l i f e m ove m e nt , Ihave expanded and clarified many areas of the original text and have addedmater ia l s which I h ope wi ll be of par t i cula r inte res t to th e reader .

This report has a three-fold purposefirst , to provide a sounding board

for the pro-l ife movement in the United States in the area of populationcontrol and those anti-l ife activit ies to which i t is inextricably bound; sec-ond, to provide suff ic ient background informat ion on the Commiss ion inorder to enh ance th e opportun it ies for examining and evaluating i ts findings

and recommendat ions on America ' s popula t ion growth and future ; and,f ina l ly, to br ing to the forefront of the American contemporary scene aprofi le of the Population Control Movement in the United Statesits goals,i t s programs, i t s resources , i t s l eadership and i t s futu re in l ight of theproposa l s of the Commiss ion on Popula t ion Growth and the AmericanFut u re .

I wish to thank all those individuals and pro-l ife organizations who con-t r ibuted both t ime and ta lent to the prepara t ion of thi s report . Inpart icular, I would l ike to acknowledge the special assistance of Anthony

Zimmerman, Rose Emmons, James Cappucc ino, Paul Marx, JohnHarrington, George Barmann, Fred Donvil le, Terry Sil lers, Colin Clark,Bob Sassone, Mary Winter, Barbara Rutkowski, Mrs. Lee Austin, Ed Bryce,and Judy and Jerry Fink.

The views expressed in thi s report a re my own and do not necessar i lyreflect the opinions or policies of Pennsylvanians for Human Life, WomenConcerned for the Unborn Chi ld, or those individua ls and organiza t ions

who ass i s ted in th e compi la t ion of mater ia l s and ideas us ed in the report .

iv


6/63

CONTENTS

Section I ABORTION AND POPULAT ION CONTROL

S. J . Resolut ion 108Popula t ion Stabi l iza t ion . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 1Inte r im Report

The Federa l Government and Abort ion

Definin g TermsFami ly Plann ing vs . Popu la t ion Cont rol

Post -Concept ive Fami ly Planning

HEW's Abortion PoliciesPackwoodTax Dollars for Abortion

Dr . He l lm a n on Abor t i onAbortion and Population ControlFedera l Dollars for Abort ion

Plann ed Paren thood .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Government Gran tsPlanned Parenthood Finances Lagging

Big Money in AbortionPlan ned Parenth ood Abort ion Cl inics

Abort ion Cou ns e l ing

HEW Abortion Policy ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Abortifacient Research .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

AID InvolvementU. S. Funded Abortor ium s?

The U. N. and Popu la t ion Cont rolScratch the Surface

0 E 0 C o n t r o v e r s y . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . 1 1

Must th e Poor Be Guinea Pigs?

Private or Pu blic Morali ty? .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Plan ned Paren thood Not a Sacred Cow

Abort ion an d Governmen t Bi r th Cont rol Programs . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 13

Asian Abort ions on the Increase

"Volunta ry" Fami ly Plann ing Programs for the Poor . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 1 3

Abort ion Open s Door to Ant i -Life Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

ComingCompulsory Popula t ion Cont rol


7/63

Section IIAn An a ly si s of the Co mm iss io n on Po pu la ti on Gro wth and t heAm er ic an Fu tu re wi th Sp ec ia l Re fe re nc e to th e Ob je ct iv it y of an dthe Values and Goals Set Forth in the Commission's Interim Report

The Hidden Cri s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

J ohn Rockefe lle r I II

The Rockefe l le r Foun dat ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 18

Interest in Population Stabil izationRockefel le r Inte r es t s in Abort ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Plann ed Paren thood Abortor ium

Popula t ion Plans Begun in 1950's

Ridgeway Conclud es:

Popula t ion Cont rol Group s Represented on Com miss ion . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 20

No Pro-Life Leaders on Comm iss ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Commiss ion Hearings Unbalanced

The Interim Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Scra tch th e Sur face and Find the Rea l Mot ive

ZPG and Minori ty Grou ps . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .22

Who Will Choose Values ?

Wanted Ch ildren On ly... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 23Large Families Scorned

Pressu res to Limi t Fami ly

Popu lation Con trolAt What Price? .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

But a t wha t pr ice?

Sect ion III Populat ion Perspect ives

Popul a t i on Pe r s pe c t i ve s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 27

A Third Possibil i tyPlato and EhrlichPrimitive Man

Ancient Populations

Malthu sian Replay .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 28Birth Limitation and the Poor

Dickens vs. Malthu s .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

The New Mal thu sians . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . 30

Class ic Argum ents About Overpopu la t ion

Horn of PlentyStanding Room Only?

World Popula t ion Dens i ty

Demographic Transi t ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Phase IPrimitive Patterns of Population Growth

Pha se IITh e "Explos ion" PeriodUniversal LiteracyNat iona l Developm ent Armies

vi


8/63

Malthu sian vs. Developmen tal Approa ch... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 7

Wrong Approa ch

Argent inaDangers of Prematu re AgingEconomic Growth

Modern J apa nA Demograp hic Profil e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Economic Considera t ions vs . Hum an Values

Forty Mill ion Abortions!Pha se IIIPopu lation Stab il ization

ZPG for the Un ited States? .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .41Causes of the Bir th DearthAbort ion an Important Fac tor

Econom ic and Polit ical Effects of ZPG .... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .42The Uni ted Sta tesa Second Rate Power?Resour ces Not Deple ted

Urban RedistributionPhase IVAging Populations

Period of Rapid Aging

The French Experience with Mal thu sianism . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .44

The Fallacy of Universal ZPG

Popu lation Edu cation an d Propagan da .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 45

Office of Edu cationZ PG Gra n t f rom 0E 0

Fam ily Planning Act of 1970

NEA Stan d on Popula t ion Sta bi li za t ion

Popu lation Texts and Teach ing Manu als .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 47

How and Why Not to Have Tha t BabyPRB Text for Primary Grades

Re-Definin g "Abort ion "

The Mass Media and the "Popula t ion Explos ion"The Role of T.V.

Popu lation Control and the Youn g .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 50Sesame St ree tThe Crowding Syndr om eCaut ion: Popula t ion Propaganda Ahead

vii


9/63

SECTI ON I

ABORTI ON AND POPULATI ON CONTROL

S.J. RESOLUTION 108-POPULATION STABILIZATION

On December 4, 197 1, in an interview with the National Jou rna l , SenatorAlan Cranston (D-Calif.; Subcommittee on Human Resources; chief

sponsor of S. J . Res . 108 on popula t ion s tabi l i za t ion; member of the

Commiss ion on Popula t ion Growth and the American Fu ture) , in resp onseto the objection th at th e resolution was "a step toward a S enate ab ortion b ill"repl ied, "Actua l ly, there i s no connec t ion be tween the resolut ion anda bor t i on . T he Congre s s ha s ne ve r i n i t s h i s t o ry e na c t e d b i l l s d i r e c t l ygoverning the practice of medicine. It is not expected that i t ever will . Iwould opp ose i ts doing so. This is a field res erved quite properly to the statelegislatures."'

Howeve r, t he m a i n t h rus t o f t he oppos i t ion t o S . J . Re s . 108 , whi c h

came from Right - to-Li fe groups a round the na t ion, was based on validevidence including the statements of Senator Robert Packwood on abortiongiven a t the t ime S. J . Res . 108 was int roduced in the Sena te 2 a n d t h epro-a bor t i on t e s t i m ony g ive n by t h e m a j o r i t y of pe r s ons a t t h e t i m e o f the Sena te hearings , inc luding Dr. Louis Hel lman, who represented theadministrat ion .3

On November 3, 1971, Charles Westoff , represent ing the Commiss ionan d i ts Cha irman , test ified in favor of S. J . Res. 108 with som e revisionsrelated to th e socially des irable goals of a popu lation sta bil ization policy. 4

I n t e r i m Repor t

The Commiss ion ' s Inte r im Report spec i f ica l ly ment ions abort ion (pp.15, 29, 30) as having probable demographic impact and sociological ramifi-ca t ions . In a ddi t ion, there a re members (inc luding mem bers an d researchsta ff of the Commiss ion) who are on publ ic record as favoring abort ionon requestDr. Paul Eh rl ich, ' Ansley J . Coale ' , Ju di th Blake Da vis 'orfavor compulsory abort ion for out -of-wedlock pregnanciesKingsleyDavis 8or have been or are associated with organizations which maintainpro-abort ion pol ic ies , inc luding Planned Parenthood-World Popula t ion,Zero Popula t ion Growth, and the Congress on Opt imum Popula t ion andEnvironment, as well as the Association for the Study of Abortion (ASA).

1


10/63

The Federal Government and Abort ion

Cl e a r l y , t he re i s a m pl e e v i de nc e t o s ubs t a n t i a t e t he c ha rge t ha t t heFedera l government i s promot ing and f inanc ing a Mal thusian ideologywhich views abortion as a legit imate birth control technique for omittedcontraception or contraception fai lure, or to control "unwanted fert i l i ty,"9

a nd t ha t t he re i s i n f a c t a ve ry r e a l r e l a t i ons h i p be t we e n a bor t i on a ndother anti-l ife activit ies, and an explici t government population policy of`stabil ization' or reduced population growth, which the Commission on

Population Growth an d th e American Futu re will propose in i ts final report .

Defining Terms

It would be best to define and dist inguish such terms as abortion, con-t racept ion, bi r th cont rol , fami ly plann ing, and popula t ion cont rol as th eyare us ed wi thin th e context of thi s report .

C o n t ra cep t i o n : The temporary prevent ion of concept ion before , duringor a f te r sexu a l inte rcou rse by prevent ing the u n i o n of s pe rm a n d ovum .

B ir th Co n tr ol : An "umbrella" term used to include all means of l imitingoffspring including steri l ization, contraception, abortion, infanticide.

F a m i l y P l a n n i n g : T he i nd i v idu a l m a r r i e d c oup l e ' s c ho i c e wit h r e ga rdt o t he nu m be r a nd s pa c i ng o f c h i ld re n .

Po p u l a t i o n C o n t ro l : The regula t ion of spec i f ic demographic pol ic iesdesigned to influence choice of family size and reinforce specific demo-graphic objectives of government as a matter of public policy.

A b or t io n : "Al l the measures which impai r the viabi l i ty of the zygote a t

any t ime between the instant of fert i l ization and the completion of laborconst i tute , in the s t r i ct sense , pr ocedures for indu c ing abort ion. -i

In Pla n n ed Pa ren t h o o d , Stone and Hines di s t inguish be tween bi r th con-trol (contraception) and abortion which "destroys a l ife already begun.' ' l lN.B.: Abortion used in this report refers to i n d u c e d abort ion by chemica l

or surgica l means .

Fami ly P lanning vs . Populat ion Contro l

It should also be noted that population control advocates clearly dist in-guish be tween fami ly plann ing and p opu la t ion pol ic ies .

"Fami ly planning programs do not a t t empt to inf luence the number of children a family desires. Any program that seeks to halt population growthmust in addit ion to providing for total availabil i ty of family planning ser-vices, seek to insure that the n u m b er of w a n t ed b i rt h s i s co n s i s t en t w i t ha s t a b l e p o p u l a t io n . " says Sen. Alan Cran ston. 12 (emphas i s ad ded).

"Population control is to l imit births, not to regulate births. It isnecessary to understand the difference," states the Republican Task Force

on Earth Resources an d Popula t ion. 13

E l a bora t i ng on "The Myt ho l ogy o f Fa m i l y P la nn e r s , " E dga r Ch a s t e e nin hi s book, Th e C a s e f o r C o m p u l s o ry B i r th C o n t rol , l ashes out aga ins tthe proposit ion that "individual family planning equals population control ,"

and quotes Kingsley Davis ' s s ta temen t th a t "There i s n o reason to expec t

2


11/63

that millions of decisions about family size made by couples in their owninte res t wil l automatica l ly control popula t ion for the benefi t of soc ie ty.O n the c on t r a ry, the re a r e good r e a s ons to th ink the y w il l no t do s o . -14

P o s t - C on c e p t i v e F a m i l y P l a n n i n g

Using the first definition of abortion taken from an official document

compiled by the U. S . Nationa l Ins t i tute of Hea lth and published by thePublic Health Service, it is clear that prostaglandins and similar "post-conceptive -15 o r -hinds ight -16 means of fe r t i l i ty control a re in fac t abor-t ifac ients . The use of euphemis t ic words and phrases such as -bringingon a pe r iod ' ' o r -onc e -a -m onth p i l l -17 o r -pos t - c o i ta l d rug -18 f o u n d i nHEW's Five Year Family Planning Program are but one example of themedical fantasies and downright dishonest claims which attempt to makec he m ic a l a bor t ions r e s pe c ta b le by l a be l ing the m c on t r a c e p t iveagents ." I w il l r e t u r n t o federal research in this a rea late r in th is reportwhen I discuss t h e abortifacient research under way by the AID (Agency forInte rna tiona l Deve lopment) and the Nationa l Ins t i tute for Child Hea ltha nd Hum a n De ve lopm e n t o f H E W .

H E W ' s A b o r t i o n P o l i c i e sH a v i ng e s t a b l i s he d t he s e de f i n i t i ons , l e t u s s e e how a bo r t i on w hi c h

w a s e xc l ude d f rom t he Tydings Family P lanning and Popula t ion Actisbe i ng b rough t i n t he ba c k doo rs o f gove rnme n t , be g i nn i ng w i t h t heO ff ic e o f P opu l a t i on Af fa i r s he a d e d b y D r . Lou i s H e l lma n .

O n j a i ma ry 22 , 1971 , S e n . R obe r t P a c kw ood a dd re s s e d , by phone , a na bo r t i on s ympos i um he l d a t t he In t e rna t i ona l H o t e l i n Los A nge l e s . Aconsiderable portion of his speech was given over to bypassing the abortionprohibi t ion of the Tydings Fami ly P lanning and Popula t ion Act (PP-WPhelped draft the original bill) which states, -None of the funds appropria ted

u n d e r t h i s title s h a l l b e u s e d i n p r o g r a m s w h e r e a b o r t i o n i s a m e t h o dof fami ly planning. - ( e mpha s i s h i s ) .

P a c k w ood T a x Do l l a r s f o r A b o r t i o n

Inc luded in h i s s u gge s t i ons w e re na t i ona l g ra n t s t o P l a nne d P a re n t h ooduni t s which could then use the i r own current monies to promote abort ion;grants to s ta tes wi th l ibe ra l abort ion laws under the Publ ic Hea l th ServiceAct ; and the u se of Soc ia l Securi ty funds un der Sec t ion V re la ted to infantca re a nd the l ike for low-income f ini l ie s . 2

Of part icula r importance was Sen. Packwood's spec ia l ment ion of Dr.H e ll ma n a s b e i ng t he a bo r t i on e s t a b l i s hme n t ' s s ympa t h e t i c li a is on w i t h i nthe Department of Health, Education and Welfare." This is a very strategics t ronghold for both abort ion and popula t ion cont rol advoca tes because theOffice of Popula t ion -w i l l a c t a s t he foc a l po i n t fo r popu l a t i on g row t hi n fO rma t i on - a nd be a gove rnme n t a l l e a de r , p l a nne r , a nd c o -o rd i na t o r i nt h i s a re a . 22

3


12/63

Dr . He l lman on Abor t ion

During the hearings on S. J. Res. 108 on October 14,1971, Sen. Packwoodquest ioned Dr. Hel lman fol lowing the presenta t ion of hi s formal presen-t a t i on r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o n t h e a b o r t io n i s s u e

S e n . P a c k w o o d : "Why is so l i t t le research done on induced abortion?I r e a l iz e we ha ve s om e va r i a t ions i n l a ws f rom s t a t e t o s t a t e , bu t

we a re no t l im i t e d on r e s e a rc h . And ye t I don ' t s e e m u c h r e s e a rc h

be i ng don e a t NIH."

Dr . H e ll m a n : "The Center for Popula t ion Research i s support ingseveral programs in this area. I agree with you that we have a tremen-dous labora tory on soc ia l change going on in the U.S. in regard toabort ion and tha t i t would be a se r ious mis take i f we le t thi s changep a s s w i t h ou t s t u d y " 2 3

A short whi le l a te r Sen. Packwood re tu rned to th e quest ion of abort ion-

S en . Pa ckw o o d : "Without gett ing into a discussion of Federal-state

re la t ions , do you think the Federa l government should be involvedin pur su ing abort ion as a meth od of fami ly planning?"

Dr. H e ll m a n : "What I think personally has l i t t le bearing. The legisla-t ion i s very def ini te on t hi s point . "

S e n . P a ck w o od : "What do you recommend should be done wi th thepresent l egi s la t ion which somewhat res t r i c t s the use of abort ion inTit le X fun ded p rojec t s?"

Dr. H e llm a n : "Sen. Packwood, I think we are going to see very rapidchange in the U.S. in a t t i tudes about abort ion. I th in k th e s lo w u p

i n t h e ch a n g e i n s t a t e a b o r t i o n l a w s l a s t y ea r w a s a t em p o ra ry

ph en om en on . As young people who don't have a hangup about abortioncome of age , we a re going to see a very rapid change in thinking.Abort ion i s an a rea where the people of the Uni ted Sta tes ought totake a l ead, not th e Federa l Governm ent ." (emph asi s ad ded) .

S e n . P a c k w o o d : "But th e prohibi t ion we are t a lking about jus t wentin last August ."

Dr . H e ll m a n : "The s ta tes a re changing the i r l aws and the i ssue i s

before the court s bu t i s s t i l l a very sens i t ive issu e ."

S e n . P a ck w o od : "But where abortion is legal , why should those statesbe denied the fun ds to provide abort ion services?"

Dr. He llm a n : "Title XIX of the Social Security Act doesn't have thatprohibi t ion, and ac tua l ly, i f abort ions a re be ing re fe rred from ourclinics, and I expect in New York state some of the cl inics supported

by T it l e V s e nd pa t i e n t s fo r a b or t ion , t h e ope ra t i ons a re p roba b l ypaid for under Tit le XIX."

Sen. Packwood: "Well, it evades the issue, but I know your personalo p i n i o n , and le t me say in your defense , i f our young people hadleaders with your vision to look to, we would move rapidly towardfreedom of cons c ience on th e abort ion i ssue ."

Dr . H e ll m a n : "Than k you, s i r ."24

4


13/63

Dr. Hel lman's persona l views a re wel l known, as a re hi s assoc ia t ionswith leading abort ion-on-deman d groups .

He ha s s e rve d a s a c ha i rm a n o f t he PPFA Me di c a l Com m i t t e e , i s ont he Boa rd o f D i re c t o r s o f t he As s oc i a t i on fo r t he S t u dy o f Abor t i on , i s

a c ons u l t a n t t o t he Popu l a t ion Cou nc i l, a n d wa s a p l a i n t i ff a long wi t hDr. Alan Gut tmach er in the New York abort ion ac t ions . 25

Dr. Hellman has also been a member of the Population Crisis Committees ince 1968.

Ab or t io n an d Po pu la ti on Co nt ro l

According to Dr. Hellman, the objective of the country's family planning

program now i s hea l th and IF TH E GOV ER NME NT E V ER S W IT CH E S

TO A POPULATION CONTROL POLICY "we'll have to use all availablemethods" inc luding abort ion."26 (emphasi s added) .

But , as Sen. Packwood suggest s , there a re many ways of c i rcumvent ingthe law before Congress "switches" to a p opula t ion con t rol pol icy.

Al though the federa l governm ent a s ye t h as no s pec i fic abort ion pol icy,the Department of HEW states that l iberalization of abortion laws "mustensure two principlessafety of the patient and elimination of social andeconomic d i scr imina t ion .27

Speaking of the impact of fert i l i ty control methods as being related to

decreased inc idence of abort ion, the report cont inues , "Abort ion wouldthen serve as a back-up measure for cont racept ive fa i lure , thereby s t i l lfu r t he r a s s u r i ng t he f r e e dom of c ho i c e o f t hos e who do no t de s i r e a nun wa nt e d b ir t h . "28

Federal Dol lars for Abortion

Current ly, wel fa re rec ipients a re be ing re imbursed under Ti t l e XIX of th e Soc ia l Secu ri ty Act . (Medica id)29

Under CHAMPUS, 3 the insurance coverage program for armed servicepe r s onne l a nd t he i r de pe nde n t s (unm a r r i e d da ugh t e r s t o a ge o f 21-23f o r s t u d e n t s ) , a b o r t i o n s m a y c u r r e n t l y b e o b t a i n e d i n s t a t e s w i t h"liberalized" abortion laws o n l y , instead of any mili tary hospital regardlessof loca l res t r i c t ions as was ordered by Dr. Louis M. Rousse lot , DeputyAs s t . Se c y . fo r He a l t h a nd E nv i ronm e nt , De fe ns e De pa r t m e n t , i n a

memorandum on July 31, 1970. This res t r i c t ion in ac tua l prac t ice cos t sthe taxpa yers double s ince se rvice wives or dependents may be t ransp orteda t publ ic expense to other a reas i f abort ions a re not ava i lable in the i rs ta te .

PLANNED PARENTHOOD

"Planned Parenthood Federa t ion of America (a l so known as PlannedParenthood-World Popula t ion) i s the l a rges t p ri v a te organiza t ion in thefami ly planning f ie ld" s ta tes the Dept . of HEW in i t s Five Year Plan(empha si s ad ded).

5


14/63

"Over the pas t few years , our organiza t ion (PP-WP) has ente red a new

and invigorating era ofpub lic -pr iva te par tnersh ip. The passage of the Fam-ily Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970 signalled ami les tone in th e deve lopmen t of thi s par tnersh ip, dove ta il ing th e e ffor t sof public agencies with our own in a framework of a greatly-expanded

c om m i t m e nt o f Fe de ra l fun ds . And a s e c ond m i l es t one wa s r e a c he d i nt he pa s t s e ve ra l m ont hs wi t h p re pa ra t i on by t he De p t . o f HE W of t hef i rs t na t ionwide f ive-year plan for fami ly planning services ( t es t imonyof Joh n C. Robbins, Chief Executive Officer, Planned Parenth ood-WorldPopulation in favor of S. J. Res. 108 on October 14, 1971). (emph asis added).

Government Grants

Which of these two s ta tement s comes c loser to the t ruth ?

Is Plan ned Parenthood pr ima ri ly a pr ivat e organi za ti on wi th

limited governmental funding, or, is it in fact a quasi-governmental

agency with a shrinking public support in the form of unrestricted

contributions?Since Planned Parenthood not only engages in abort ion re fe rra l and

couns e l ing, bu t a l so opera tes ab ort ion c l inics of it s own, th e quest ion of the extent of the u se of t axpayer ' s money i s of cons iderable impor tance .

In 1970, PPFA, Inc., (not including affi l iates) received the followinga m ount s : 31

Approx. 2.6 mi l lionun res t r ic ted cont r ibu t ions2.4 mill ionrestricted contribu tions.8 mill ionother sou rces

5.8 m i ll iontota l publ ic sup port

1.0 m ill ionGran ts from Governm ent Agencies

According to Planned Parenthood's pres ident , Dr. Alan Gut tmacher ,report ing in hi s persona l newsle t te r of Ju ne 18th , 1971,

"Government funding has permitted affi l iates (PP) to open numeroussa te l l i t e c l inics and employ indigenous people as Planned Parenthoodworkers to teach family planning in their own neighborhood. The Washing-

ton office reports that in 1970-71, 125 affiliate projects shared $10,057,273,exclusive of Medicaid payments. The lion's share (over $9.25 million) wasprovided by the Federa l government in a roughly 5 to 3 ra t io be tween0 E 0 a n d H E W "

Dr. Guttmacher goes on to state that governmental funding on each occa-

sion requires new matching funds, usually 25%, and that "these government

grants free unrestricted citizens' contributions to finance new areas of

service excluded from government subsidy. - (emphasi s added) .

P l a n n e d P a r e n t h ood F i n a n c e s L a g g i n g

In Planned Parenthood Report, issued in March-April 1971, Dr. Gutt-macher highlighted the activit ies of PP-WP and i ts affi l iates for 1970 andtook note of their increased services and expanded activit ies, and the need

for grea te r financ ia l sup port f rom government .

6


15/63

-For the f i rs t t ime in a decade ," he reported, "gi f t s to a ff i l i a tes fa i l edto grow, and gi ft s to na t iona l headqu arte rs fel l off ."

Big Money in Abort ion

To what extent Planned Parenthood's ac t ivi t i es in abort ion wi l l he lpboost i t s l agging financ ia l resources i s , of cou rse , un ans werable a t thi st ime.

Clear ly, however , abort ion in genera l i s a very lucra t ive f i e ld, as Dr.Irwin H. Kaiser, chief of obstetrics-gynecology at Lincoln Hospital in NewYork (-famous " for i t s l a rge ou t -pa t ient a bort ion fac i li t ies) pointed ou t to

t he a bor t i on e s t a b l i s hm e nt a t t he L os Ange l e s s ym pos i um m e nt i one dearlier.

When asked about the financing and costs of the out-patient cl inic, Kaisersaid that i t was impossible to give an accurate accounting of who got whatfrom where an d tha t they did a cer ta in am ount of midnight requis i t ioning.He then went on to say -We have vas t ly more than recouped thi s (about$65,000) by now. At $160 per pa t ient , thi s i s a substant ia l money-makerfor th e hosp ital and, obviously, if we were prepared to step into th e competi-t ive New York market, where abortions go as high as $1,500, we probablywould make a substantial kil l ing, if I nay use that expression. (Great laugh-

te r f rom au dience!)32

P lanned Parenthood Abort ion C l in ics

As of 1971, Planned Parenthood was operating at least three aboratoriums,including an out-patient center in Alameda-San Francisco area fbr "low-income" patients, a cl inic in Syracuse, and one in New York which willperform 8,000 -10,000 low cost abort ions per year . 33

In New York City, Planned Parenthood operates a Family Planning Ser-vices Information Service fbr the ci ty, which gives infbrmation and makesreferrals for birth control , voluntary steri l ization, and abortion for ci ty resi-de n t s .

Ab or t io n Co un se li ng-Ac ros s t he na t i on , 181 P l a nne d Pa re n t hood a f f i l i a t e s we re i nvo l ve d

in abortion counseling," says PP-WP medical director (NY) Dr. GeorgeL a ngm yhr . 34 Planned Parenthood, Mi lwaukee , for example , has rece iveda $15 0,000 grant f rom HEW which was matched b y $75,000. This permi t tedPP to increase i ts services by 50% to include contraception, steri l izationand "abortion referral ."

According to PP, abortion counseling and referral are "educational andpol i t i ca l " as wel l as pure ly "service ," tha t i s , a tota l program a imed a teduca t ing the publ ic so as to "mold a new a t t i tude" toward abort ion; to"i nc re a s e t he nu m be r o f t he ra pe u t i c a bor t ions p e r fo rm e d u nde r t he l a win the Bay area a nd th roughou t California; and to work for furth er l iberaliza-t ion of the l aw" an d oth er objec t ives . 35

The Center for Family Planning Program Development is a key PlannedPa re n t hood a ge nc y e s t a b l is he d i n 1968 t o p i one e r m e t hods o f p rogra m

7


16/63

planning for community-wide family planning programs and is financedprimari ly through foun dat ion grants .

Last year the Center conducted a survey in the Pi t t sburgh m et ropoli t anarea and revea led tha t there were an es t imated 57,000 women who want

and / or need family planning services. This su rvey resulted in a $1,00 0,000grant from the Dept. of HEW to the Family Planning Council of Southwest-e rn Penn sylvania , Inc .

Magee-Womens Hospital , in Pit tsburgh, is one of the 25 health relatedagencies assoc ia ted wi th the C oun ci l.

Ac c ord i ng t o i t s 1971 Annua l Re por t , Ma ge e -W om e ns Hos p i t a l i sdedicated to "the conception, gestat ion and birth of a healthy, WANTEDbaby in an environment where he can develop to his maximum potential ."( e m pha s i s a dde d) . T owa rd t h i s e nd , Ma ge e -W om e ns , t he l a rge s t non-governmenta l materni ty se rvice hospi ta l in the count ry, aborted 1,709un born chi ldren las t year .

HEW ABORTION POLICY

This fi l tering down of Federal funds to hospitals performing abortions-

on-demand is in keeping with HEW Secretary Ell iott Richardson's 1970s t a t e m e n t t h a t " I don ' t a n t i c ipa t e t h a t we (HE W) woul d t a ke a pos i t ion

on this (legalized abortion) as a Federal agency, beyond saying, in effectthat , one; i t is primarily a matter for state action and, two; that in general

W E B E L I E V E T H A T M E D I C A L S E R V I C E S I N C A S E S W H E R E A

P R E G N A N C Y I S U N W A N T E D O R W H E R E I T IS M E D I C A L L Y

U N D E S I R A B L E S H O U L D B E A V A I L A B L E T O W O M E N W I T H O U T

U N D U E L E G I S L A T I V E R E S T R I C T I O N S . -36 (emph asis added).

ABORTIFACIENT RESEARCH

In the a rea of abort ion research , Federa l fun ds a re be ing fun neled into

the Contraceptive Development Branch (CDB) of the Center for PopulationResearch (CPR)a uni t of the Nat iona l Ins t i tute for Chi ld Heal th and

Hum a n De ve l opm e nt (NHI) of the Department of HEW.

The CDB, which las t year rece ived a fu l l t ime di rec tor according to

S c i e n c e M a g a z i n e (March 26, 1971) is reviewing a number of contractsrelat ing to abortion including one "to explore the use of microwaves andul t rasound in performing abort ions ."37

A.I.D. I nvo lvement

The development of prostaglandins, i . e . , for use as abortifacients, whicha c c ord i ng t o Dr . Re i m e r t Ra ve nho l t o f t he Age nc y fo r In t e rna t i ona lDevelopment wi l l be very sui table in deve loping count r ies because theyact th rou gh "post -conceptive (h inds ight) mea ns of fert i l ity control ,"38 h a sbeen given top pr ior i ty in AID, which inves ted som e th ree mi l lion dol la rs

in pros taglandin r esearch in 1969. (Popula t ion Coun ci l).39

8


17/63

In i ts latest report , Pop u l a t i on Pro g ra m As s i s t a n ce (December, 1971),

AID s t a t e s t h a t i t c u r re n t l y ha s $4 .4 m i ll ion i nve s t e d i n p ros t a g la nd insin cont rac t s wi th the Worcheste r Foundat ion for Experimenta l Biology,the Upjohn Company, the Royal Veter inary Col lege (Sweden) and theUnivers i t i es of North Carol ina , Wisconsin, Michigan, Harvard, Yale ,Hawaii , Washington, Michigan (St. Louis) and Makerere (Uganda). Col-laborative cl inical trials of prostaglandin are already in progress in NorthCarolina , Michigan, Massa chus e t t s , Conn ec t icut , Missouri an d Hawai i in

the U. S. and in India , Uganda , the Uni ted Arab Republ ic , Yugoslavia ,Grea t Bri ta in and Singapore and wi l l rapidly be extended to addi t iona ldeve loping cou nt r ies .

The Universi ty of North Ca rolina recently received a grant of $3.1 millionto sup port pros ta gland in f ie ld t r ia l s tu dies .

According to Carl Djerassi of Stanford University and president of SyntexResearch, Pa lo Alto, Cal iforn ia , "su rgica l abort ion m us t be u sed, in ca seof fa i lure , as back-up procedure during the research phase on chemica labortifacient ." This is why AID is sponsoring the cl inical work on prostag-landins (agents expell ing the embryo or fetus) in countries (Sweden, GreatBr i t a in , Uga nd a ) la c k i ng s u c h l e ga l r e s t r a i n t s . . . . 4 0

Djerassi states that research on chemical abortifacients should be giventop, or nea r top pr ior ity as a fu ture fe r t i li ty cont rol agent . He a l so tak es

note of the fac t tha t b oth th e AID and the Center for Popu la t ion Research(NH I) "seem to have found ways of c i rcumvent ing Sec t ion 1008 of the1970 Fami ly Plann ing Act" and have ma de important cont r ibut ions to thi sa rea of research. 41

U. S. Funded Abortor iums?

In a section on various types of family planning centers to be developedby AID in the 1970's, Po p u l a t i o n Pro g ra m Ass i s t a n ce ra i ses the spec t reof Uni ted Sta tes spons orship and / or su pport of so-ca l led "pregnancy cen-te red" fami ly plann ing programs .

"Wi th the advent of post -concept ive methods of fe r t i l i ty cont rol (es-pec ia l ly pros taglandins) fami ly planning programs in many areas seeml ike ly to become more "pregnancy-centered"with emphasi s on ear ly

diagnosis of pregnancy, termination of unwanted pregnancies, and the con-tinuing provision of oral contraceptives, intrauterine devices, and steri l iza-t ion services." (p. 12)

Further on in the report we read "As legal restrictions on post-conceptivefert i l i ty control are removed, for example, India in 1971, i t is foreseeablethat family planning program strategy will center upon the early diagnosisand relief of unwanted pregnancy, followed by provision of contraceptive

informat ion and services needed to prevent subsequent pregnancies .

"Such pregnancy-centered programs can be much more e ff ic ient thanordinary family plann ing programs b ecause women who be l ieve they m ayhave an unwanted pregnancy wi l l ac t ive ly seek out any fac i l i ty offe r ingrelief, and hence education and promotional costs of the family planningprogram can be greatly reduced, and the t ime from inception of the program

to redu c t ion of fer t i li ty can be m inimized.

9


18/63

"Provision of rel ief of unwanted pregnancy plus effective contraception,for example, steri l ization, can achieve fert i l i ty reduction of more than onebirth per clinic acceptor and have a powerful and rapid effect upon fertilitypa t te rns ." (pp. 34 -35)

The U.N. and Populat i on Contro l

In 1967, the Secre ta ry-Genera l of the Uni ted Nat ions es tabl i shed theUni ted Nat ions Fun d for Popu la t ion Act ivi t ies (UNFPA) to expand the

ac t ivit i es of the organ iza t ion in th e a rea of popu la t ion/ fami ly plann ing.The Uni ted Sta tes , as i t s major supporte r , has a l ready cont r ibutedmillions of dollars to th e agency.

If Congress should attempt to cut off funds for abortion and abortifacient

research from AID or similar agencies, i t may very well be that the UNFPAwill become the funnel for gett ing abortion research and supportive fundsinto the r ight hands wi thout undue legi s la t ive di ff icul t i es . This i s onereason why U. S. dol la rs to thi s agency need to be careful ly moni tored.

Anot he r r e a s on why t he popu l a t i on a c t i v i t i e s o f t he U . N . w i l l be o f g re a t i m por t a nc e i n r i gh t - t o -l if e groups a t h om e a n d a broa d i s t h e f a c tthe U. N. is considered by those interested in controll ing world population

as THE idea l medium for se t t ing up the ini t i a l machinery and providingample financing toward this particular long-range goal. A reading of World

PopulationA Challenge to the U. N. and Its System of Agencies, a reportprepa red b y a Nationa l Policy Pan el of the UNA-USA with J ohn RockefellerIII as chairman will, I believe, support the possibility of a World PopulationCont rol Center wi thin the Uni ted Nat ions .

AID's s u ggestion tha t ab ortion is a n effective mean s of "fert i l ity contro l"was well outl ined las t year in HE W's Five Year Plan by R. T. Ravenholt ,director of AID's Office of Population which prepared the text of PopulationProgram Ass istance in coopera t ion wi th var ious U. N. and U. S. agenc iesas well as organizations including Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF),the Popula t ion Counci l , the Ford and Rockefe l le r Foundat ions , the Pa th-f inder Fund, the Popula t ion Cri s i s Commit tee and the Popula t ion Refer-e nc e Bure a u .

"Effec t ive use of precoi ta l or preconcept ive (cont racept ive) means of

fert i l i ty control requires the exercise of foresight. For many individuals,part icularly in developed countries, these methods have been quite success-ful . But for many others in al l societies and part icularly in the developingcoun tries, u se of foresight mean s of fert i li ty contr ol is difficult an d r eliancesolely on th ese mean s is less efficient an d m ore expensive. For these grou ps,access to post-coital or pos t-conceptive (hind sight) mean s of fert i l ity controlis imperative for adequate control of fert i l i ty." (p. 281)

Scratch t he Sur face

This i s presented as be ing only a smal l port ion of the Federa l govern-ment's involvement in abortion which is being subsidized by the Americantaxpayeran involvement which wi l l increase , as Dr. Hel lman suggest s ,i f the government adopts a popula t ion pol icy, and i f HEW's Five YearFa m i l y Pl a nn i ng a n d Popu l a t i on Re s e a rc h p rogra m goes u nc ha l le nge d .

0


19/63

OEO CONTROVERSY

Si nc e t he roo t o f t he a bor t i on p rob l e m i s t h e gove rnm e n t ' s p rom ot i onof Neo-Malthusianism or Planned Parenthood ethics as a matter of P U B L I C P O L I C Y , I wil l therefore address myse l f to thi s problemeven whi leabortion i s exc luded as a method of fami ly planning.

By 1971, the Off ice of Economic Opportuni t i es had rece ived some 26million dollars for program s r elat ing to family plann ing,42 a por tion of whichhas been given to PP affi li a tes to carry on su ch program s.

In one spec i f ic case , Planned Parenthood of San Diego re jec ted a sumof $150 ,000 fo r 1972 f rom t h e OE O t h rough i t s OE O off ic e . Ac c ord i ngto a report in a San Diego press re lease , the Execut ive Di rec tor of theEconomic Opportuni ty Center sa id, "The organiza t ion (PP) i s in non-compl iance because one-thi rd of the board i s supposed to represent the

poor of the community. This is hardly the case." He also stated, "PP hasa lways ignored OEO guide l ines to adequate ly represent the poor . Theywould not follow the guidelines for a ' racial ly balanced district , ' " to whicha PP representa t ive answered tha t PP does not intend to do so andtherefore i t plans to reject the OEO grant.

W ha t we s e e i n e f f e c t he re i s a " de m oc ra t i z a t i on" o f b i r t h c on t ro lt e c hn i que s i n t e nde d t o l i m i t t he poor whi l e t he powe r r e m a i ns i n t he

han ds of the Malthu sian e l it e .

Must the Poor Be Guinea P igs?

Another specific injustice relating to federally sponsored family planningprograms involves th e u se of welfare recipients and minority poor for hu manguinea pigs withou t informed cons ent .

The Sou t hwe s t Foun da t i on ha s r e c e ive d from t h e Fe de ra l gove rnm e nta three year gran t of $913,000 for the s tud y of s te roids . 43

A portion of the resea rch, ca rried on by Dr. J oseph Goldzieher, involvedthe ph ysiologica l or ps ychologica l ly ind uced e ffec t s of the Pill.

In a Hasting Center report published in the Spring of 1971 by the Insti tuteof Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, an art icle writ ten by Robert M.

Veatche , ent i t l ed "Experimenta l Pregnancy" expla ined Dr. Goldz ieher ' smode of opera t ion.

Poor , m ul t i pa rous Me xi c a n-Am e r i c a n wom e n ha d c om e t o t he Sa nAntonio, Texas , c l inic for bi r th prevent ion devices and ins t ruc t ions .Seventy-s ix of these who were told they were reac t ing to the Pi l l weregiven placebos whi le others rece ived a var ie ty of hormona l compoun dsinc luding some conta ining chlormadinore ace ta te progest in (recent ly

banned from a l l fur ther human invest iga t ion because of bad s ide e ffec t sin beagles) . Of the women on placebos , t en became pregnant and remaineds o be c a u s e , a c c ord i ng t o Dr . Gol dz ie he r , " We c ou l d h a ve a bor t e d t h e mif the a bort ion s ta tute in Texas weren ' t in l imbo r ight now!"

The Ha s t i ngs Re por t r a i s e d m a ny e xc e ll e n t e t h i c a l que s t i ons r e l a t i ngt o t he i n j us t i c e o f un i n fo rm e d c ons e n t a nd a s ke d why i t i s a l wa ys t hepoor tha t must be the subjec t of experiments of thi s kind ins tead of theresearchers ' wives and dau ghters .

11


20/63

PRIVATE OR PUBLIC MORALITY?

But the dangers of Neo-Mal thusianismor as Americans have come toknow i t , Planned Parenthoodare not only re la ted to the poor , for the

ideology which i t promotes is a ch allenge to the entire J ud aeo-Christ iancommun i tyregardless of economic c i rcums tance .

Neo-Mal thusians can never de l iver on the i r promisesto ensure on lywanted chi ldren in a fami ly, to bui ld mari ta l happiness , to e radica te -il-legal - abort ions and venerea l di sease , and to promote the wel fa re of thec om m uni t y . For t he i r s i s a n i de o l ogy ba s e d on l y on s e c u l a r hum a ni s mand crass hedonismthe adopt ion of which gnaws away a t the backboneof moral virtue and strong family l ife based on fideli ty and sacrifice andlove.

Planned Paren thood Not a Sacred Cow

The Federa l government has no r ight to adopt i t as a na t iona l c redo

without first fully debating a ll the implications for society, part icularlythose relat ing to family stabil i ty which Neo-Malthusianism tends to break

down, rather than build up. Instead of increasing i ts involvement in familyplanning, the Federa l government must begin phasing i t se l f out , s t a r t ingwith a d ivorce of al l family plann ing policies from welfare. Governm ent

programs in the a rea tend inherent ly to invade pr ivacy and, ul t imate ly,th e right to l ive.

At the Second World Popula t ion Conference , he ld in Belgrade in 1965,a Korean official pointed out the relat ionship between government promo-tion of family l imitat ion and abortion when he stated that a nation which

launches a bi r th cont rol campaign O W E S i t to the ci t izens to l iberalizeabortion laws to a certain extent. There will be many unwanted pregnancies,he explained, and the people should have a method of meeting this problem(e m pha s i s a dde d) . T he f a c t is t h a t onc e t he gove rnm e nt p u t s i ts e l f in t othe business of promoting contraception, i t wil l be held responsible for

s ubs e que n t f a i l u re s . T he e s t a b l i s hm e nt o f t a x - s uppor t e d na t i onwi deabora tor iums , which has a l ready been proposed by the a bort ion es tabl ish-ment , i s a very rea l poss ibi li ty in th e not - too-dis tant futu re .

The problem is further complicated by the fact that anti-population prop-aganda tends to increase the re luc tance of parents to bear chi ldren who,under more normal c i rcumstances , would be accepted and welcomed intothe family. Hence, it is likely that government promotion of family limitation

will resu lt in MO R E , not fewer, unwanted chi ldren.

This is the case in contemporary Jap an, where pr ior to 1948 , a p ro-natalistpolicy was in effect and "unwanted children" were practically non-existent.Today, there are many fewer births in Japan but the number of "unwantedchildren" has increased, as evidenced by an increasing number of childbea t ings , exposures and parenta l neglec t by mothers and fa thers who arebus y with other th ings .

12


21/63

ABORTION & GOVERNMENT BIRTH CONTROL PROGRAMSThis may also help to account for the fact that massive government pro-

grams of cont racept ion, intended in p ar t to redu ce na t iona l abort ion ra tes ,do jus t th e opposi te.

This has been the experience of Chi le (Sant iago region) , Korea , andTaiwanall of which have, since the early 1960s, been taking part in mas-s ive IUD programs promoted and f inanced by the Uni ted Sta tes ' Agencyfor Inte rn a t iona l Developmen t (AID), th e Rockefe l le r Fou nd at ion, th e

Popula t ion Counci l , and the Ford Foundat ion.

According to a spec ia l ASA report , In te rn a tio n al Con s u lta n ts ' Re po rt1970, in grea te r ur ban Sant iago, Chi le , the abort ion ra te in 1961 was 15.5%of all pregnancies. By 1966, the rate had increased to 20.1% of al l pregnan-c ies " in s pi te of the u se of cont racept ion."

Asian Abortions on the Increase

In Korea , 74% of pa t ient s on ora l cont racept ives h ave had induced ab or-t ions . . .and 58% who have di scont inued use of the IUD have a l so experi -enced induced abortion .. .the art icle then notes "The proportion of wivesprac t ic ing cont racept ion pr ior to and/ or a f ter induced a bort ion i s mu chh i ghe r t h a n t hos e who ha ve ne ver h a d a n i nduc e d a bor t ion . "

T a i wa n ove r t he l a s t t h re e ye a r s ha s e xpe r i e nc e d a n i nc re a s e i n t he

number of induced abort ions . "These findings lead to an impression thatp rom ot ion of fa m ily pl a n n in g m a y in fa ct in crea s e ab ort ion , p a rti cu la rly

a t the in i t ia l s ta ge o f the program w hen a large proport ion o f wom en

are anxious to keep the ir families s mall, yet are unable to avoid unw anted

p regn an cie s com pl e te ly ." (emph asi s a dded) (pg. 4).

"VOLUNTARY" FAMI LY PLANNING PROGRAMS FOR THE POOR

As for the argument that prohibit ing government promoted birth controlprograms rob the poor of the " freedom" to l imi t the i r numbers , i t shouldbe no t e d t ha t unde r T i t l e XIX of t he Soc i a l Se c ur i t y Ac t , m ot he r s a re

free to go to their own physicians, and free to get family planning adviceun der tota l medica l care , which i s as i t should be .

T he c ons t a n t p rob l e m of t he Ma l t hus i a ns s i nc e t he da ys o f T hom a sMalthus is not gett ing birth control information to the poor but convincingthe poor that they need to l imit births, as evidenced by the candid statementof Dr. David L. Cra ne o f t he Sa ra s o t a Coun t y He a l th De pa r t m e n t whi c hwas ente red into the hearing report of Family Plann ing Services.

" I s pe a k fo r e ve ry a re a , no t j us t fo r t h i s c oun t y . I do no t know a nyarea in the county where anyone has found a formula tha t wi l l ge t morethan 25% of the needy pa t ient s se rved a t an acceptable cos t which couldbe a pp l i e d na t i onwi de . Me a nwhi l e , t he o t he r 75% who a re no t s e rve da re i nunda t i ng us w i t h a no t he r ge ne ra t i on o f i nd i ge n t s . T h i s i nde e d i sa s e r i ous p rob l e m ! I hope s om e o f t he one b i l l i on t o be p rov i de d wi l lbe uti l ized ($1,100 mill ion allocated in 1970 Family Planning Act) to findsolutions to the problem of how to get patients to accept our free s ervice!"'4

13


22/63

ABORTION OPENS DOOR TO ANTI-LIFE FORCESGiven the "nature of the beast ," I believe that the Commission on Popula-

t ion Growth will come out in favor of an explici t population policy directeda t ' s t abi l i z ing ' the American popula t ion ra ther than a report cente red ont he wa ys i n whi c h Am e r i c a c a n a c c om m oda t e a ve ry m ode ra t e , i nde e d

a very low level , of population growth if immigration is taken into considert io n . I n t u r n , a n a c c ep t a n c e o f t h e C o m m i s s io n ' s r e c o m m e n d a t i on s w

in fac t be an acceptance of Neo-Mal thusianism as an American way of l ifewith all of its a t tenda nt evils including p ermissive abortion, contr acep-t ive s t e r i li za t ion, eu than asia , infant ic ide , and gene t ic en gineering.

ComingCompulsory Populat ion Contro l

It is not merely coincidence that one of Planned Parenthood's most zeal-ous l ea de r s i s a l s o a b oa rd m e m b e r o f t he Abor t ion Ri gh t s As s oc ia t i onof New York, Inc., a member of the Medical and Public Health Committeeof the Association for Volun tary Steri l ization, Inc., is on the Advisory Coun-cil of the Euthanasia Education Fund, and is a board member of the Path-f ind er Fu n d. ABORTION CONTRACEPTIVE STERILIZATION

EUTHANASIA POPULATION CONTROL al l a re c lose ly re la tedanti-l ife activit ies which will be promoted and financed by the Federalgovernment unless s teps a re t aken now to divorce Mal thusianism from

gOvernment policy. The eventuality of compulsory birth control, abortion,s t e r i l i z a t i on a nd de a t h c on t ro l a l s o m us t be c ons i de re d , onc e s uc h"volun tary" programs a re pu t into e ffec t an d protec ted b y law.

14


23/63

FOOTNOTES SECTION I

1 " Hum a n R esour ces , " Na tio n al Jo ur n al (December 4, 1971) , p. 2401

2 U. S. Congressional Record, June 2 , 1971 , S 7968

3 T e s t im o n y o f D r . L o u i s H e ll m a n b e f or e t h e S p e c i a l S u b c o m m i t t e e o n H u m a n R e s o u r c e s

of the Senate Labor a nd Publ ic Welfare Commit tee, October 14, 1 971 (reference to prostagland

in s)

4 T es t i m ony o f D r . C ha r l e s W es t o f f be f o r e t he S pec i a l S ubcom m i t t ee on H um an R esour ces

of the Senate Labor and Publ ic Welfare Commit tee, November 3, 1971

5 " The D r i ve t o S t op P opu l a t i on G r ow t h , " U . S . N ew s and W or ld R epor t ( M ar ch 2 , 1970) , p .

37

6

A ns l ey C oa le , " Man and H i s E nv i r onm en t , " Science, CLXX, (Oct . 9, 1970 ) , p. 136J. B . Da vis , "Survey on Abortion," Science (F eb . 12 , 1971 )

Fran k J . Ayd, "L iberal Abort ion Laws," Am er ica (Feb. 1, 1969) , pp. 130-32

9 The term "unwanted fer t i l i ty" is found in the Commission report "Demographic S ignif icance

of Unwanted Fert i l i ty in the U.S . : 1970," by Charles Westoff and Norman Ryder , P r incetonUniversi ty, and in "The Extent of Unwanted Fert i l i ty in the U.S . ," remarks by Charles

Westoff at th e ann ual m eet ing of PP-WP, October 28, 1 969

" U. S . D ep t . o f H ea l t h , E duca t i on an d W el fa r e , P ub l i c H ea lt h S e r v ice , pub l i ca t i on 106 6(Wash ington: 1963) , p. 27

" A. S t one a nd M . B . H ines , P lanned P aren t hood , ( Bi ngham t on , N . Y. : V ik i ng P r e s s , 1951) , p .40

"The Congressional RecordSenate, June 2, 1971Introductory remarks on S . J . Res. 108

"Hearings on Res. 1 08Declarat ion of U .S . Pol icy of Populat ion S ta bi l izat ion b y Volun tary

M e a n s , 1 9 7 1 , U . S . G o ve r n m e n t P r i n t i n g O ff ic e , W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . 1 9 7 2 N o . 6 8 - 9 7 6 0 . p .

37

" The C a s e f o r C om pu l s or y B i r t h C on t r o l , E d g a r R . C h a s t e e n , P r e n t i c e H a l l, N . J . , p . 9 1

15 U.S. Office of Population Affairs, Office of the Asst. Sec'y. for Health and Scient i f ic Endeavors ,A Fiv e Ye a r Pla n fo r P op u la tio n Re s e ar ch an d Fa mi ly Pla n n in g S er v ice s , 9 2 n d C o n g . , 1 s t

Session, Commit tee P rint . No. 68-1780

"Ibid ., p . 2 8 1

"Ibid ., p . 3 9

"Ibid ., p . 5 9

19/ bid ., p. 39

" P au l M ar x , T he D ea t h P edd l e r s , ( Co l l egev i ll e , M inn . : S t . J ohn ' s U n i ve r s i t y P r e s s , 19 71) ,

pp. 39-60

21/ bid ., p. 59

"HEW Five Year P lan, op . ci t . , p . 2 2

" Res . 108 H ea r i ngs , p . 4 24

"Ibid ., p . 4 2 8"Robert M. Byrn, "Abort ion-on-Demand: Whose Moral i ty?" No tre Da m e La w y er , XCVI (Fa ll,

1970), p. 24

15


24/63

26- Abort ion Law Mental Test Ca l led 'Sha m, ' W a s h i n g to n P os t , November 25, 1 971, B-4

27HE W Fiv e Y e a r Pla n ., op . ci t. , p. 319

""Heal th Insurance for Abort ion Costs: A Survey," F a m i ly P la n n i n g P e rs p e c t i v e s , Vol. II,

No. 4 (October , 19 70) , p. 12

p. 20

" Pl anned P a r en t hood- W or l d P opu l a t i on A nnu a l R epor t , 1970

"Marx, op . c i t . , p . 147

33 P.P . to Open Abort ion Clinic Soon, N. Y . Ti m e s , 12- 5 - 71

"Marx, op . c i t . , p. 34

""Counselling and Referral in Legal Abortion in California's Bay Area,' ' F a m i l y P l a n n i n gP e r s p e c t i v e s , Vol. II, No. .3 (June, 1970), pp. 14-15

36F a m i l y P l a n n i n g S e r v i c e s HearingAug. 3,4, & 7, 19 70 Serial No. 91-70 U.S . Governmen t

Print ing Off ice, Washington, D .C . 1970, p. 99

"Robert Gillet te , "Populat ion Act ," S c i e n c e ( Mar ch 2 6 , 1971) , p . 1221

"H E W F i ve Y e ar P l an , op . c i t . , p . 281

"Gillette, o p . c i t .

"Carl Djeras si , "Fert i l ity Contr ol Through Abort ion" Bul let in of the Atomic Scient is ts , Vol.

XXVIII , No. 1 (Jan uar y, 1972) , pp. 1 2-13

4 ' Ibid. , p. 13

"HEW F i ve Y ear P l an , op . c i t . , p. 300

p. 286" F am i l y P l ann i ng Se r v i ce s Hearing, op . c i t . , p. 461

16


25/63

SECTION II

An An a ly s is of th e Co m m is s ion on Pop u la tion Gro w th

and the Am er ican Fu tur e Wi th Sp ec ia l Re fer ence to

the Objectiv i ty o f and th e Values and Goals S et For th

in the Comm iss ion 's In ter im Repor t .

THE HIDDEN CRISIS

We are bigger, yes. But is America the better forincreased population? I think not . . .For uncheckedpopula t ion growthin our count ry as e l sewhere

threa tens , i f not human l i fe i t se l f , then sure ly l i feas we wan t i t to be . . .. . . myriads of personal choices are at th e root of the

popu l a t i on p rob l e m . . .The popula t ion problem i s not on e of two dimensions ,bu t o f th re e . T he t h i rd d i m e ns i on t ouc he s t he ve ry

essence of hu man l ifeman's des i re to l ive as wel las to surviveThis emph asi s on the qu a l ity of li fe i s for u s in t hi sfavored land , the heart of the m at te r . Uncheckedpopu la t ion growth wi ll u l t imate ly place th i s th i rdd i m e n s i o n b e y o n d o u r r e a c h , e v en i n A m e r ic a . . .Some may question whether the American populationconst i tutes a popula t ion ' c r i s i s . ' I be l ieve the word

crisis is just ified: Its dict ionary meaning is 'a t imefor de c i s i on ' . . . T HE CHOICE IS NO L ONGE R W HE T HE RPOPULATION STABILIZATION IS NECESSARY, BUT ONLY HOWAND W HE N IT CAN BE ACHIE VE D. (e m p ha s i s a dd e d)... Let me suggest three practical opportunit ies for

action .. .Firs t : we sh ould inform our se lves m ore ful ly abou tthe popula t ion problem . . .Second: . . . the popu la t ion p roblem . . . is so

ram ified .. . THAT ONLY GOVERNMENT CAN A TTACK IT ON

THE SCALE REQUIRED . . . (e m pha s i s a dde d)Third: In p lann ing the size of our own families, weshould weigh carefully the collective effect of ourdec i s ions upon the future wel l -be ing of our communi t ies . '

17


26/63

John Rockefe l ler I l l

From "The Hidden Cri s i s ," Loo k , F e b r u a r y 9 , 1 9 6 5

This article appeared more than six years ago and was authored by JohnRockefe l le r I II , foun der an d t ru s tee of the Popu la t ion Cou nci l, Ch ai rmanof the Rockefeller Foundation (America's leading non-governmental birthcontrol promotion center 2 and channel for America's funds into world popu-l a t ion c on t ro l3) Advisory Board member of the U. N. Popula t ion Fund,and current ly the Chai rman of the Commiss ion on Popula t ion Growth and

the American Fu ture .

THE ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION

I n terest in Populat ion Stabi l izat ion

In the Rock ef elle r Fo un d a tion An nu al Re por t (1967-68) , chapter on Prob-lems of Popula t ion (pp. 11-15) , the commitment of the Foundat ion in thearea of "finding widely acceptable and applicable means of achieving popu-lation stabil ization," is acknowledged.

The thrust of the Foundation's grants during this period is directed atincreasing the involvement of the health profession in the field of popula-t ion. Thus, major appropriat ions were directed at Cornell Universi ty and

Corn ell Medical Center in New York, Tu lane Un iversi ty in New Orlean s,an d Baylor Univers i ty in Hous ton.

On the International level , the Foundation works through the Population

Council, with a sizable grant directed at the Council's Technical AssistanceDivis ion wh ich t ra ins p opula t ion workers through educa t iona l scholarshipsin fami ly plan ning and d emograph y.

Founda t i on funds we re a l s o funne l e d a broa d t h rough t he Uni ve r s i t yof North Carol in a , Ch apel Hi ll , and the Sch ool of Publ ic Heal th of theUniversi ty of California at Berkeley.

The Foundation's population grant program also included Emory Univer-s i ty in Georgia ; Pr ince ton Univers i ty in New Jersey, and the Univers i tyof Michigan in Ann Arbor.

In the most recent bound edi t ion of i t s annual report (1969-1970), U.

S. grants f rom the Foundat ion have been given to Columbia Univers i ty,New Jersey; George town Univers i ty, Washington, D.C. ; Howard Univer-s i ty, Mass achu se t t s ; th e Ins t i tute of Soc ie ty, Ethics , and Li fe Sc iences ,

New York; Prin ceton Universi ty, New Jer sey; Rockefeller Universi ty, NewYork; University of Chicago; University of Michigan; University of NorthCarolina; Universi ty of Wisconsin; Universi ty of Connecticut .

In addit ion to funding population research and family planning programsv i a un i ve r s i t y a nd m e di c a l s c hoo l s , Founda t i on s uppor t i s e x t e nde d t ot h e Population Reference Bureau a n d t h e In te rn a tio n al Pla n n ed Pa re n t-hood Federation, Western Hemisphere Region.

The Foundat ion report c i t es two "very successful" programs inc ludingt he L ou i s ia na Fa m i l y P la nn i ng p rogra m a t T u l a ne Uni ver s i t y he a de d byDr. J oseph Beasley, an d a model program a t the Un iversi ty of Chile. Plann ed

18


27/63

Parenthood, New York City, and the Center for Family Planning Develop-ment of the Plann ed Parenth ood Federa t ion of America a re a l so inc luded.

This partial listing of Rockefeller Foundation grants to most of the majorpopu l a t i on r e s e a rc h a n d s t u dy c e n t e r s i n t he Uni t e d S t a t e s i nd i ca t e s , t o

a cer ta in degree , the f inanc ia l l everage which the Foundat ion i s able todi rect in the a rea of popula t ion research.

The Rockefeller Foundation and the Ford Foundation are the two largestfoundat ion cont r ibu tors in the a rea of popu la t ion an d fami ly planning.

It is of importance, I believe, in discussing the Commission on PopulationGrowt h a nd t he Am e r i c a n Fu t u re , t o no t e t ha t m a ny o f t he r e s e a rc he r sfor the Commiss ion were se lec ted from the univers i t i es and centers men-t ioned above inc luding Prince ton, U. of Wisconsin, U. of Cal i fornia , U.of Chicago, Columbia, Insti tute of Society, Ethics, and the Life Sciences.Indeed, Pr ince ton represen ta t ion of the Commiss ion research s ta ff appearsto be dominant (the Taeubers, Westoff, Keller, Tietelbaum, Coale, Daniel-son, a nd Viederman ).

ROCKEFELLER INTERESTS IN ABORTION

I n t h e President 's Report, pub l i s he d by t he As s oc i a t i on fo r t he S t udyof Abort ion, on ASA, i t s Funct ions and i t s Needs , major cont r ibutors toASA fund ing ($5,00 0 or more) include th e Population Coun cil, Joh n Rocke-fe lle r I II , the Rockefe lle r Brothers Fun d, a nd the Rockefe ller F oun dat ion.

In November, 1968, at the ASA Hot Springs Virginia International Confer-e nc e on Abor t i on , J ohn Roc ke fe l l e r I I I de l i ve re d a m a i n a ddre s s on"Abortion Law ReformThe Moral Basis," in which he states that restric-t ive abort ion laws "mu st be chan ged to a l l evia te the evi ls in our soc iety"(the un wanted chi ld, poverty, physica l su ffer ing, e tc . )

His long-range answer to the abortion problem is "to el iminate abortionlaws altogether, replacing them only with a requirement that a duly licensedph ysician perform the ab ort ion."

Planned Parenthood Abortor iumPlanned Parenthood's New York abortorium, which gives priority to low-

income residents of the ci ty, was established with funds pledged by Th e

Roc k ef elle r Bro th ers Fun d ($200,000), the Scaife Family Trust of Pit tsburgha nd a n a nonym ou s dona t i on o f $60 ,000 . Ac c ord ing t o A lf re d F . Mora n ,the center "will be a prototype for the development of addit ional centersthroughout the c i ty, s ta te and na t ion."

Population Plans Begun in 1950's

Li ' 'Pollution al id Population" from The Politics of Ecology, James Ridge-way enla rges on the Rockefe l le r inte res t in the popula t ion cont rol move-m e nt :

"In 1957, an ad hoc committee of population experts from the council ,the Rockefe l le r Fun d, Conserva t ion Foun dat ion, and Plan ned Parent -

19


28/63

hood publ i shed a scheme for cont rol l ing popula t ions ca l led Popula-

tion: An International Dilemma. T he r e por t s a i d popu l a t i on c on t ro lwas the key to s tabi l i ty in both r ich and poor na t ions . The idea wasto persuade educated people of the population dangers. The committeebe l i e ve d popu l a t i on wa s a p rob l e m i n t he U .S . , a nd s ough t t o us etax, wel fa re and educa t ion pol ic ies to "equa l ize bi r ths among thesoc ia l ly handicapped. -

In 196 3, th e popu lation-control people created an organization calledthe Popula t ion Cri s i s Commit tee , and made Gen. Wi l l i am Draper

chairman. It acts as a quasi-governmental organization through whichU.S. funds can be routed to birth control programs in underdevelopedcountries. Since the U.S. finds i t embalTassing to funnel money forbirth control to backward Catholic countries, it runs the money throughDraper ' s group, and from there i t goes out to Planned Parenthoodgroups abroad

Ridgeway concludes:

The Neo-Mal thusian doc t r ine , r i s ing among both the technocra t sand the ecologis t s , looks l ike a narrow, manipula t ive scheme a imedat cont rol l ing th e poor in th e inte res t s of the weal thy. 4

POPULATION CONTROL GROUPS REPRESENTED ON COMMISSIONOther Comm iss ion m embers as soc ia ted wi th popu la t ion cont rol inte res t s

or group s or l egis la t ion inc lude :

Be rna rd Be re ls on Pre s ide n t , T he Popu l a t ion Cou nc i lGeorge D. WoodsTrustee, The Rockefeller FoundationJ oseph D. Beas leyPP-WP Techn ical Assista nce DivisionSenator Jos eph TydingsCoal it ion for Nat iona l

Popu la t ion Pol icySenator Robert Packwoodsponsored Nat iona l Abort ion Act

(S 1750 ) and Sena te J oint Resolut ion 108 onpopu lation stab ilization

Senator Alan Cranstonsponsored S.J . Res . 108

The Comm ission's Executive Director is Ch arles R. Westoff, th e National

Advisory Counci l of Plan ned Parenth ood-World Popu la t ion.The research staff of the Commission as recorded in the Interim Report

inc ludes:

Cha rles R. WestoffPP-WPChr i s t ophe r TietzePopulation Council; MedicalRe s po ns ib ilitie s Co m m itt ee of th e Ab ortio n R igh ts

As s oc ia tio n , New YorkPaul Ehrl ichFounder of Ze ro Pop u la tio n Gro w th , Inc .;

Congress on Opt imum Popula t ion an d Env ironmen t

St e phe n Vi e de rm a n The Population CouncilFreder ick S. J affePP-WPS h e ld o n J . SegalPopulation CouncilPhyllis T. Piotrow Secreta ry, Population Crisis

20


29/63

Comm it tee: Vic tor-Bostrom Fun d, PP-WP.

PeterB ro w n In s ti tu te of S oc ie ty , Et h ics , a n d th eLi f e S ci e n ce s (foun ded in par t by Rockefe l le r Foun dat ion)

O t h e r w e ll - k n o w n a d v o ca t e s o f p o p u l a t io n l im i t a t i o n o r a b o r t i o n -on-demand or both inc lude :

Conra d T a e ube rBure a u o f the Ce ns u sAns ley J . CoalePrincetonJ u dith Blak e DavisUniversity of California, Berkeley

Lincoln H. DayUni ted Nat ionsKingsley Da visUnivers i ty of Ca l ifornia , Berke leyPreston CloudUniversi ty of California, Santa Barbara

NO PRO-LIFE LEADERS ON COMMISSION

No R ig h t- to -L if e le a d e r is l isted either on the Commission or on the

Research staff, al though i t appears that key personnel of organizations pro-moting population control and, in almost al l the cases, abortion-on-demand,are exceedingly well represen ted NO T ON LY in terms of research posit ionsbut a l so, more importan t ly in the cha i rman sh ip and execut ive direc torshipof this Commission.

Commiss ion Hear ings Unbalanced

I have not had an opportuni ty to examine a l l the hearings ' t es t imonyand the new research papers which have been added to the Commiss ionfiles since the Interim Report was completed. I have noted, however, thatcer ta in groups such as PP-WP have had severa l opportuni t i es to presentthe i r opinions to the Commiss ion. Whi le a few Right - to-Li fe wi tnesses

have been a ble to render t es t imony a long with d emographers , economist s ,e tc . , who are opposed to popu la t ion cont rol , here aga in, I do n ot be l ievetha t the record w h e n c o m p le t e d will show balance. In my view, therefore,bo t h t he In te ri m R e p or t a n d t h e Fin a l Rep o r t will not be representativeof a wide spec t ru m of pu bl ic opinion.

Rather, the Report will represent the minority viewpoint of the vocalMalthu sian coercive popu la t ion cont rol advoca tes of thi s n a t ion who h ave

in recent years been taken over by eugenic enthusias t s , soc ia l engineers ,and pro-abort ionis t s deman ding tha t th e ir views be t ran s la ted into pu bl icthat i s , governmen ta lpol ic ies .

THE INTERIM REPORT

But le t me be specific in my objections to the Interim Report , beginningwit h t h e c ho i c e pos e d i n Cha p t e r One : Do we wis h t o c on t i nue t o g rowas a na t ion in t e rms of resources and demands for se rvice or do we wish

to concent ra te our energies a nd resources to improve the "qua l i ty of li fe"for the needy of our society?

I think that th e best ans wer to this ques tion is given, again, by J amesRidgeway, who says:

21


30/63

"The Neo-Malthusians argue that population control means economicbe t te rment for the fami ly. But there i s nothing whatever to indica te

tha t popula t ion cont rol programs resul t in income di s t r ibut ion. IT I S

JU S T T H E O P PO S IT E . (emph asis added ) Population control is a mean s

for rule rs to cont rol the populace . And when the i ssue i s consideredi n t e rm s o f m ode rn t e c hn o l ogy , popu l a t ion c on t ro l be c om e s a wa yto increase th e weal th of a few individu a ls an d corpora t ions ."

Citing th e fact that the s igners of the pro-population control Hugh MooreFund newspaper advertisements include George Champion of the ChaseManhat tan Bank (a Rockefe ller ban k) , Frank W. Abrams, Stan dard Oil of New Jersey, Lammot duP. Copeland of duPont, Ridgeway concludes thatthese s ame p eople now ask that "the ma sses cont rol the size of their familiess o t ha t t he p l unde r c a n c on t i nue . "5 From an hi s tor ica l point of view,Malthusian economics designed to "freeze" a part icular level of nationalwealth or s tand ard of living by reducing the nu mber of sha rerschar acteris-t i c o f F ra nc e fo r m ore t ha n t wo c e n t u r i e s ha ve p rove n t o be ha rm fu lto na t ions over the long hau l .

Scratch the Sur face and F ind the Real Motive

I think Americans would do wel l to fol low Mr. Ridgeway's examplea nd s c ra t c h t he s u r fa c e t o f i nd t he m ot i ve be h i nd t he Ma l t hus i a n ' s"concern" for humanity, part icularly the poor, whose fert i l i ty has alwaysmad e them n ervous even in the c lays of the Reverend Malthu s .

ZPG AND MINORITY GROUPS

One of the more practical rather than theoretical applications of so-called"population stabil ization" revolves around the issue of minority groups,par t i cula r ly blacks an d Sp anish-speaking Americans .

I do not be l ieve tha t those advoca t ing popula t ion cont rol a re rac i s t s ;

tha t i s , they a re not inte res ted in black genocide. To the Malthusian, colori s not as important a fac tor in the i r campaign as po ve rty , s o i n a s e ns ethey can be sa id to pr ac t ice democra t ic eugenics . Thu s , they a re as joyful

at the prospect of sterilizing poor white Appalachia as they are of securing"abort ion r ights " for blacks in Harlem.

As i t happens , however , whi le whi te Protes tant s and Jews have bi r thrates which are at replacement levels, Blacks, Puerto Ricans, and Mexican-Americans a re reproducing wel l above replacement l eve l in most cases .Thus , for the former group Z.P.G. wi l l have l i t t l e meaning, but for thela t te r i t wi l l pose spec ia l problems, s ince they ' l l have a longer way tocome to achieve a zero objective set by population controllers. Soif thisCommiss ion goes on record as favoring popula t ion s tabi l i za t ion, i t can ' tbe accused of minori ty genocideit s i m p l y h a p p en s t o w o rk o u t t h a t w a y .

The re la t ionship be tween tax supported programs of abort ion for thepoor and the reduction of welfare costs was explained by Dr. GarrettHardin a t an abort ion conference in Cal i fornia in May, 1969:

22


31/63

"If the total circumstances are such that the child born at a part iculart ime and un der par t i cula r c i rcumsta nces wi ll not rece ive a fa i r sha kein l ife, then she (the mother) should knowshe should feel in herbonesthat she h as n o r ight to cont inu e the pregnan cy . .. It may seema rather coldhearted thing to say, but we should make abortions avail-a b l e t o ke e p down our t a xe s , bu t l e t us no t he s i t a t e t o s a y t h i s i f

such a s ta tement wi l l move legi s la tors to do what they should doanyway."

Dr. Hardin i s not a lone in espousing the view tha t publ ic ly f inancedabortions of the poor and welfare recipients are a taxpayers' bargain, whicheliminates the costs (about some $20,000+) of raising one ADC child frombi r th to 17 years of age . This , no doubt , accounts for the fac t tha t manymiddle and upper-c lass Americans who are reac t ionary on other i ssues ,(fo example, sharing the wealth) suddenly become very l iberal with regardto bi r th cont rol , s t e r i li za t ion, and abort ions in the ghe t to.

W ho W i ll Choos e Va l ue s ?

Chapter 4 of the Interim Report, Policy Issues (p. 25), has another phrasewhich probably more than any other revea l s the Mal thusian leanings of thi s Comm iss ion ' s Inte r im Report :

" T he Com m i s s i on v i e ws popu l a t i on po l i c y no t a s a n e nd i n i t s e l f but as a mean s to facili tate the ach ievement of other social goals desir-a b l e in t h e ir own r i gh t . -

The report goes on to l is t th ose which would (not shou ld) be inc luded.

As this statement implies, population policies involve a choice of ends.W he re t he Ma l t hus i a n ru l e s , t he s e e nds wi l l be ba s e d on a n i de o l ogyof secular humanism, and human norms end up taking a back seat toeconomic, technological , and scientific norms. This part icularcharac te r i s t ic of Mal thus ian beh avior m ani fes t s i t se l f today in th e a rea of abort ion, where a human l i fe i s des t royed to insure a higher s tandard of l iving or to preserve the "quali ty of l ife" of the parents or children alreadyb o r n .

WANTED CHILDREN ONLY

Indeed, the Commission statement which includes the goal of "improvingthe hea l th and opportuni t i es of chi ldren born because they a re wanted"ra ther than improving the hea l th and opportuni t i es of a l l chi ldren bornpa ra l l e l s t he t h i nk i ng o f Dr . A l a n Gut t m a c he r , p re s i de n t o f P l a nne dPa re n t hood-W or l d Popu l a t i on , who s a ys :

" W e a re t ry i ng t o s t i m ul a t e t he c re a t i on o f wa n t e d c h i l d re n a ndWANTED CHILDREN ONLY. - ( e m pha s i s a dde d) i n A b or t io n a n dthe Unw anted Chi ld . 6

W hi c h o f us i s s o foo l is h a s t o b e l ie ve t ha t m a n wi ll e ve r r e a c h s u c ha s ta te of mora l perfec tion tha t he wi l l welcome every newborn?

There will always be u nwan ted children b orn just a s there ar e un wantedadu l ts . Bu t what i s it tha t di s t inguishes a barba rian from a c ivi li zed ma n

23


32/63

i f i t i s no t t he l a t t e r ' s c onc e rn fo r t he unwa nt e d , t he ha nd i c a ppe d , t heaged, or the m enta l ly or spi r i tua l ly re ta rded?

Just because an unborn chi ld may not be wanted ( the c r i t e r ia here forbe ing unwanted i s somewhat vague) cer ta inly does not mean tha t he i s

unworthy or worthless . The degree of a chi ld ' s "wantedness" has nothingt o do wi th t he r i gh t s a nd oppor t un i t ie s whi c h be l ong t o h i m be c a us e o f the very fac t of hi s exi s tence , nor can i t be the de te rmining fac tor when

his l ife is u p for grab s to fulfil l a wan t less th an l ife itself.Vi ta i s s t i l l v i ta , even though i t may not be l a d o l ce v i t a . Generally

i nc re a s i ng t h e qua l it y o f li fe i s a l a u da b l e goa l . Bu t wh e n t h e " qua l it y"of li fe t akes precedence over l ife it se l f as i t did a t Dacha u, then i t is t imeto reassess priori t ies.

La r ge F ami l i e s Scor ned

Another objectionable segment of the Interim Report relates to thematter of averages (p. 9); that is, the Report states that even in a stabil izedpopulation there will be room for al l size families including those with nochi ldren to those wi th many. Again, the Commiss ion i s dea l ing in theorywhich sounds fine, but the issue of practicali ty is another matter, for in a

nation Which adopts Malthusianism as a national policy, (that is, a nationwhich a t tempts to hold c lown popula t ion growth) , there i s no room for ala rge fami ly, which in Mal thu sian te rms mean s four or more chi ldren.

No Mal thusian ever planned and got e ight chi ldren. When the PP-WP

pos t e r s a ys " KE E P YOUR FAMIL Y T HE RIGHT SIZ E ," r i g h t m e a n sone or two, with th ree as th e oute r l imi t .

The contempt for l a rge fami l ies by the Mal thusian can be seen in ah a n d b i ll p u t o u t b y P la n n e d P a r e n t h o o d e n t i t le d " S o Yo u F i n a l ly H a da Boy?" in which la rge fami l ies ' parents a re charac te r ized as immora l ,se l fi sh, an d even k i ll e rs of futu re genera t ions .

If one wish es to see Malthu sianism in a c t ion, then a careful s tud y of Anthon y Zimm erman 's c lass ic s tudy of Fa m i l y L if e i n Po s t w a r Ja p a n i sin order. 8

As Zimmerman, a l eading demographer a nd res ident of Ja pan for twenty-two years explains : "No law forces J apa nes e coup les to l imit family sizethrough bi r th cont rol . However , the Eugenic Protec t ion Law makes a l lforms of bi r th cont rol l ega l . Pressure appl ied by off ic ia l promoters and

t h rough m a s s c om m u ni c a t ions doe s t he r e s t . . . "9

Comment ing on th e e ffec t of the popu la t ion cont rol movement in J apan ,he continues, "The movement i tself makes couples want to avoid childrenby a l l m e a ns ; i t c r e a t e s a hos t i l i t y t o m ore t ha n t wo o r t h re e c h i l d re nin a fami ly. I t educa tes people to l e t things dr i f t , to t ake the eas ies t

population growth and the american future (extremist prolife propaganda)

Documents