{"id":76945,"date":"2015-10-13T16:47:55","date_gmt":"2015-10-13T20:47:55","guid":{"rendered":"\/news\/?p=76945"},"modified":"2015-10-16T12:34:09","modified_gmt":"2015-10-16T16:34:09","slug":"why-planned-parenthood-is-guilty-despite-policy-change-on-baby-part-sales","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/why-planned-parenthood-is-guilty-despite-policy-change-on-baby-part-sales\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Planned Parenthood is guilty, despite policy change on baby part sales"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards informed the National Institutes of Health<\/a> that the abortion giant would no longer “accept reimbursement” for baby body parts harvested during and after abortions.<\/p>\n

Though she wrote that one basis of this decision was to “expose our opponents’ false charges about this limited but important work,” the decision itself demonstrates the charge is anything but false. An “ethical” organization need not change policy if it “adheres to the highest legal, medical, and ethical standards.” What is there to change?<\/p>\n

As Representative Diane Black said<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

It is curious that, while Planned Parenthood officials maintain there has been no wrongdoing, they still find it necessary to change their policy following the recent undercover videos. Clearly, this was a decision motivated by optics rather than the organization\u2019s conscience. If Planned Parenthood truly wanted to confront its growing scandal, it would stop aborting more than 327,000 innocent lives each year and fully commit to true women\u2019s health care…I suppose Doctor Mary Gatter will have to find another way to get her Lamborghini, but rest assured \u2013 this development does not change my conviction that Planned Parenthood should not be subsidized by American taxpayers.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Beyond the fact that this policy change is an admission of guilt, there are still ways Planned Parenthood could – and likely will – continue to profit from baby part sales.<\/p>\n

“In-Kind ‘Reimbursements'”<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"deborahnucatolaz-e1437510387131\"<\/p>\n

As I wrote previously<\/a> about Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola:<\/p>\n

\n

While Planned Parenthood deceptively claims it makes no profit, Nucatola is full of ideas and plans…to help the buyer make a good business based on helping abortion clinics profit from \u201cexcess\u201d fetal tissue.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Getting rid of aborted babies and their parts is a problem for Planned Parenthood. Simply throwing them in the trash is illegal. Therefore, companies that actually want those dead babies can solve a potentially costly problem for Planned Parenthood.<\/p>\n

\n

At one point in the video<\/a>, she [Nucatola] suggests payment in services in addition<\/em> to monetary \u201creimbursement\u201d for the tissue \u2013 a clear violation against the law that prohibits purchasing body parts.<\/p>\n

\u201cSay, \u2018I\u2019ll give it to you for the same price, AND I\u2019ll do that\u2019. \u2026 [T]hat would be a huge sell, a huge, huge sell.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Even with the monetary “reimbursement” supposedly out of the way, Nucatola’s strategy may be one Planned Parenthood will follow. She explained that the abortion clinics have a hard time finding a company to dispose of all the “tissue.” Her idea? Get the company that wants certain baby body parts to take all<\/em> the tissue – for far less than this gruesome ‘service’ is usually billed for.<\/p>\n

In-kind profit is still a profit.<\/p>\n

Payment for the Change in Abortion<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"CMP<\/p>\n

This rather disgusting idea was proposed<\/a> by Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast’s Director of Research, Melissa Farrell. Originally, her idea was to have the baby body parts companies pay for the unethical change in abortion procedure by paying extra for the body parts themselves. But since her goal is to have the extra time and complexity monetarily covered, it’s easy to see that Planned Parenthood could find a way to accomplish this.<\/p>\n

\n

PP: Yeah, we can work it out in the context of \u2014 obviously, the procedure is more complicated. So that anything that we integrate into that procedure, without having you cover the procedural cost, is going to be higher. So anything of a higher gestational age, there\u2019s more opportunity for complication, there\u2019s more administrative time involved,<\/p>\n

PP: Sometimes the procedures are longer. So then, anything that we piggy-back onto that for collection purposes, obviously, would have to, that additional time, cost, administrative burden.<\/p>\n

Buyer: Right. So our compensation to you\u2026could be built into that.<\/p>\n

PP: Yeah.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Planned Parenthood’s policy change also\u00a0smacks of other desperate excuses, made in past investigations that evidenced the abortion giant’s lawbreaking, women-harming, deceptive actions.<\/p>\n

When a 2011 Live Action sting <\/a>found Planned Parenthood staff incredibly willing to work with sex traffickers to arrange abortions for the women and girls they victimize, Planned Parenthood announced<\/a> it “would retrain thousands of staff members across the country on its rules for reporting possible dangers to minors, and would automatically fire anyone who violated them.”<\/p>\n