Crisis pregnancy center

A crisis pregnancy center (CPC), sometimes called a pregnancy resource center (PRC)[2] or a pro-life pregnancy center,[3][4] is a type of nonprofit organization established by anti-abortion groups primarily to persuade pregnant women against having an abortion.[5][6][7]: 1  In the United States, CPCs that qualify as medical clinics may also provide pregnancy testing, sonograms, and other services,[8] while many others operate without medical licensing under varying degrees of regulation.[9] CPCs have frequently been found to disseminate false medical information about the supposed physical and mental health risks of abortion,[10][11][12] and sometimes promulgate misinformation about the effectiveness of condoms and prevention of sexually transmitted infections.[13] CPCs are sometimes referred to as fake abortion clinics by scholars, the media, and supporters of abortion rights, due to deceptive advertising practices that obscure the anti-abortion agenda of CPCs from potential patients seeking abortions.[14][15][16][17]

A CPC in Lincoln, Nebraska (foreground) intentionally located across the street[1] from an abortion clinic (background).

CPCs are often run by Christian groups which who adhere to a strictly socially conservative and anti-abortion viewpoint,[18] and they often operate in affiliation with one of three non-profit organizations: Care Net, Heartbeat International, and Birthright International. As of 2017, there were approximately 2,300 CPCs in the United States,[19] as compared with 808 abortion clinics.[20] Hundreds more CPCs operate outside of the U.S., including Canada, Latin America, Africa, and Europe.[21][22] These CPCs often are operated or financially supported by the same American organizations, and use similar tactics as the CPCs in the United States.[23] During the presidency of George W. Bush (2001–2009), CPCs received tens of millions of dollars in federal grants.[24] As of 2015, more than half of the U.S. states helped to fund crisis pregnancy centers either directly and/or through the sale of Choose Life license plates.[25]

Legal and legislative action regarding CPCs has generally attempted to curb deceptive advertising,[26] targeting those that imply that they offer abortion services by requiring centers to disclose that they do not offer certain services or possess certain qualifications.[27] In 1993, the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) was formed to provide legal advice to CPCs in the U.S.[6][28][29]

Origin
Protest against crisis pregnancy center in Chicago

Catholic carpenter Robert Pearson started the first CPC in Honolulu in 1967 after abortion was legalized in Hawaii. Pearson said that "a woman who wanted to terminate her pregnancy 'has no right to information that will help her kill her baby.'"[30] He formed the Pearson Foundation to help others start their own CPCs, offering detailed instructions for CPC management along with propaganda brochures and images to persuade pregnant women not to get an abortion.[14][31] In 1968, the first network of centers was established by Birthright, in Canada. Alternatives to Abortion, today known as Heartbeat International, was founded in 1971. Christian Action Council founded its first center in Baltimore, Maryland, in 1980. Christian Action Council eventually would become Care Net.[32] The CPC movement began as American Catholic activism, but after the 1973 passage of Roe v. Wade, interest in establishing CPCs widened to include American evangelical Christians.[31]

Activities

While CPCs often look like abortion clinics and are intentionally located near them,[5][33] most are not legally licensed as medical clinics and do not offer medical services.[9] However, CPCs often offer non-medical support, such as free pregnancy tests, pre-natal care, and classes for budgetting and resume building. Some even supply clothing and other supplies.[34]

There is a trend toward CPCs obtaining some form of medical certification, largely to support another recent trend of offering sonograms in an attempt to convince women to carry their pregnancies to term.[35][29][36][37] They may also provide screening for sexually transmitted infections, adoption referrals, religious counseling, financial assistance, prenatal services, child-rearing resources and other services.[35][38][39]

Peer counselors are typically covered by mandated reporting laws with regard to statutory rape, and they are encouraged to ask about the age of the woman and the biological father.[40] In the United States, CPCs do not offer contraception, despite advertisement that sometimes gives the appearance that they do.[41] Others may offer Bible study sessions and peer counseling for women who have recently had abortions.[6]

CPCs have been criticized for misleading advertising, for the dissemination of inaccurate medical information, for religious proselytism, and for subjecting clients to graphic videos.[42][43] The British Pregnancy Advisory Service, an independent abortion-providing agency,[44] said that young women were particularly vulnerable to religiously influenced anti-abortion "Crisis Pregnancy Centres", unregulated by the National Health Service, because many of the women knew less about the healthcare system or did not want to consult their family GP.[45] Additionally, CPCs have been accused of the racial targeting of Black women, as CPCs have focused on what they call "underserved" communities in an attempt to lower the high rates of abortion in communities of color.[30]

Crisis pregnancy centers, along with hospitals and fire and police stations, are designated by state law in Louisiana as emergency care facilities where parents may surrender custody of newborn infants.[46]

Use of sonograms
Ultrasound scanner

Some CPCs conduct free sonograms as a way to dissuade women from abortion.[5][47][34] Proponents say that women who visit CPCs and see their embryos or fetuses through the use of ultrasound technology tend to decide against abortion, although scientific research suggests mandatory pre-abortion ultrasound has no effect on women's decisions to continue their pregnancy.[48]

Organizations such as Colorado-based Focus on the Family and the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, have worked to equip more CPCs with ultrasound machines.[49][50][51]

False medical information

CPCs have frequently been found to disseminate false medical information.[11][12] In some cases such information may be based on decades-old studies that have been discredited by more recent research.[18] In others, CPCs may falsely claim to be describing an existing scientific consensus.[12] CPCs' false information is usually about the supposed health risks of abortion, saying, for example, that abortion is much less safe for pregnant women than childbirth when the opposite is true.[10][18][37] The Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine and the North American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology characterize the care at these centers as lacking "adherence to medical and ethical practice standards".[52]

One common medical claim is the assertion of a link between abortion and breast cancer. Crisis pregnancy centers have told clients that their chances of getting breast cancer increase dramatically after abortion.[7][10][11][18][33][37][45][53][54][55][56] Major medical bodies (including the National Cancer Institute)[57] say that there is no link between abortion and breast cancer.[18][33][53]

Another assertion is that of a link between abortion and mental health problems. CPC counselors have warned clients of severely negative psychological consequences, including high rates of depression, "post-abortion syndrome", post-traumatic stress disorder, suicide, substance abuse, sexual and relationship dysfunction, propensity to child abuse, and other emotional problems.[5][10][18][33][45][56][58][59][60] "Post-abortion syndrome" has not been validated as a discrete psychiatric condition and is not recognized by the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, nor the American Public Health Association.[61][62][63][64][65][66] The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists finds no evidence to support an increased likelihood of abuse.[60]

CPCs may also claim that surgical abortion is a dangerous procedure, with a high risk of perforation or infection and death.[5][18][55][58][59][67] In fact, the risk of complications requiring hospitalization after an abortion is approximately 2 in 1,000 in the US.[68] The alleged risk of perforation and infection is also part of the assertion that abortion negatively impacts future childbearing, by increasing the risk of infertility, miscarriages, complications, ectopic pregnancy, or fetal health problems.[10][18][56][58][59][60] These claims are not supported by medical data.[59][60]

CPCs have also been found to disseminate misinformation about birth control methods, in particular the idea that contraception and condoms do not work or have harmful effects.[18][33][67]

False information about pregnancy and the female body[59][67] or about fetal development[55] may also be provided, as may misinformation about the availability of abortion in early pregnancy[55][59][69] and the rate of postpartum depression among women who carry to term,[70] CPCs may also misinform women about their stage of pregnancy in order to prevent them from seeking an abortion until it is no longer legally possible.[71][72][73]

Care Net denounces "any form of deception in its corporate advertising or individual conversations with its clients", though they also say of their promotion of an abortion–breast cancer link that their "role is clearly to include this possible risk when [they] educate clients about all the risks of abortions."[37]

Religious affiliation

The overwhelming majority of CPCs in the U.S. are run by Christians according to a conservative Christian philosophy.[2][18][74][75] As of 2007, two Christian charities, Care Net and Heartbeat International, accounted for three quarters of CPCs in the United States.[76] Care Net, the largest CPC network in the United States, is explicitly evangelistic in nature, and says that its "ultimate aim...is to share the love and truth of Jesus Christ in both word and deed"[77] and that its "pregnancy centers are committed to sharing the love of Jesus Christ with every person who walks through their doors."[78] Heartbeat International, one of the largest CPC networks in the United States and also the largest CPC network in the world,[79] runs "Christian crisis-pregnancy centers"[80] and describes itself as a "Christian association of faith-based pregnancy resource centers" whose materials are "consistent with Biblical principles".[2] The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), which works with CPCs on legal issues, "strongly believes that sharing the Gospel is an essential part of counseling women in pregnancy help medical clinics".[75] Some CPCs are run by the Catholic Church[7] or by other church groups.[35][81] Unaffiliated CPCs, or CPCs affiliated with other organizations, may provide a religious perspective in their counseling.[27][33][82][83]

In contrast to the overt Christian perspective of most CPC networks, Birthright International has a stated philosophy of non-evangelism.[84] A Jewish CPC organization, called In Shifra's Arms, also exists.[85]

Many CPCs require their staff to be Christian.[86] For example, as a condition of affiliation, Care Net and the Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services, the two largest CPC organizations in the United States and Canada respectively, require each employee and volunteer of a prospective affiliate to comply with a statement of faith.[10][87][88][89] CPCs unaffiliated with either of these may also require staff to be Christian.[90][89][91][92][93]

Religious activity is sometimes part of a CPC customer's experience. Care Net, which "is committed to presenting the gospel of our Lord to women with crisis pregnancies",[89] claims to have effected over 23,000 conversions or restatements of Christian faith.[78] NIFLA "strongly believes that sharing the Gospel is an essential part of counseling women in pregnancy help medical clinics".[75] Some visitors to CPCs report that employees subjected them to unwanted evangelizing.[33][67][94][95]

CPCs outside the United States are also frequently Christian. CareConfidential, the largest umbrella network for CPCs in the United Kingdom, runs "Christian-based pregnancy crisis centres"[96] and is a division of the Christian charity CARE.[97] The Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services, a similar network in Canada whose centers may also affiliate with Care Net or Heartbeat International, describes itself as a "Christian charity";[98] its affiliates "adhere firmly to Christianity".[10] The United States-based Human Life International runs "Catholic pregnancy centers" in Mexico[99] and also provides aid to the Centros de Ayuda para la Mujer, a network of CPCs in Latin America whose philosophy is "in conformity with the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church."[100] As in the United States, unaffiliated CPCs may also be run by church groups or are otherwise Christian.

Affiliation with the anti-abortion movement

Most crisis pregnancy centers are affiliated with several major anti-abortion organizations in the United States; these are Care Net, Heartbeat International, Birthright International, and National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA).[28] A CPC may be affiliated with more than one network. US based Care Net and Heartbeat International are the world's two largest CPC networks with about 3,000 associated centers between them in the United States and abroad.[101][102] Italy, for example, has more than 400 CPCs associated with Heartbeat International, the largest number outside the U.S.[103] The largest UK organisations are CareConfidential and LIFE, while the largest Canadian one is the Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services (CAPSS). Human Life International, a Catholic group opposed to abortion, also runs CPCs outside the United States.

Advertising methods
Example of an advertisement for a CPC

CPCs have been criticized for deceptive advertising. Some falsely advertise abortion services, attracting clients who wish to have an abortion.[6][27][104][105] In the 1980s, investigative reporters from the Arizona Republic, the San Francisco Chronicle and CBS News, among others, filed stories about CPCs attracting women by offering free pregnancy tests but then presenting them with religious arguments and scare tactics against abortion.[106] CPCs may intentionally locate near, and look like, abortion clinics;[5][33] critics have also objected to CPCs' use of rhetoric and advertising language similar to those of abortion providers, such as "Plan Your Parenthood" or a directory listing under "abortion services" or "clinics". These, they say, may mislead pregnant women seeking abortion into contacting a CPC.[5][35][33][107] In particular, the advertising approach of the Pearson Foundation, which assists local groups establishing CPCs, has been criticized by some other anti-abortion groups, including Birthright International, another CPC operator.[67] The foundation recommends that a center seek out women who want abortions through "neutral" advertising, and refuse to answer questions that would reveal that they provide neither abortion services nor referrals to abortion services.[67] Pearson, identified by some as the founder of the first CPC, said that a woman "has no right to information" that will allow her to have an abortion.[94] In Ireland, when abortion was illegal except in circumstances where pregnancy endangered the mother's life and women often went to the United Kingdom to end their pregnancies, "rogue" CPCs, in contrast to government sponsored pregnancy centers, might falsely give the impression in their advertising that they referred women to Britain for abortions or otherwise provided information for women seeking to travel for abortion.[108][109]

In recent years, CPCs have also begun using the Internet as a means of advertising. Some use search engine optimization to get their websites closer to the top of search results[110] or bid against abortion providers to appear at the top of sponsored link sections on Google and Yahoo.[18] Heartbeat International, a Christian association that runs 1,800 crisis pregnancy centers, recommends that CPCs use two websites, one fundraising website that describes an anti-abortion mission to secure donors, and another website that purports to provide medical information to attract women seeking contraception, counseling, or abortion.[111]

In August 2022, after a group of 21 Democratic senators criticized Google for displaying CPC's alongside abortion clinics in search and map results when users searched for abortion services, Google stated that they will now clearly demarcate whether a clinic "Provides abortions" or, when Google is unable to verify that the clinic provides abortions: "Might not provide abortions".[112][113][114][115][116] Yelp stated that it will use new labels to differentiate CPC's into separate categories from clinics which provide abortions.[116][117]

Legality of advertising methods

Much legal and legislative action around CPCs has attempted to rein in deceptive advertising by CPCs seeking to give the impression that they provide abortions or other women's health services.

Lawsuits against a number of CPCs have determined that they engaged in false advertising and required them to change their methods, or led to settlements where they agreed to do so. CPCs that advertised that they provided abortion services were forbidden from doing so[27][104][118] or obliged to affirmatively tell clients that they did not do so.[27][37] In some instances, CPCs were prohibited from using names similar to nearby medical clinics that provided abortions,[118] from providing pregnancy tests,[27][37] or from advertising pregnancy tests as "free" if they were conditional upon hearing a presentation or counseling.[37] In one of these cases, the CPC argued that they did not receive money from clients and were therefore not subject to regulations on commercial speech, but the court ruled that they were not exempt because they aimed to provide services rather than exchange ideas.[118]

Several ordinances requiring CPCs to post signs disclosing that they do not provide abortions, birth control, referrals for either, and sometimes other medical services have been enjoined, with courts finding that such "compelled speech" violates the centers' rights.[119][120][121] In December 2009, Baltimore, Maryland was the first local government to introduce and pass a CPC ordinance—Ordinance 09-252, "Limited Service Pregnancy Centers—Disclaimers".[122] Austin, Texas, amended its law requiring centers to disclose that they do not offer abortion or birth control services to instead require them to disclose whether they do offer medical services under the direction of a licensed health care provider.[123] A bill in Oregon would require its CPCs, currently unregulated, to disclose whether or not they provide these services, and bar them from releasing health information collected from clients without the clients' consent.[124][125][126] In San Francisco, rather than compelling any speech, the city ordinance is framed as a false advertising law which allows courts to fine CPCs up to $500 every time they falsely imply in an advertisement that they offer abortion services.[127] The law's constitutionality was upheld in federal court, with a judge dismissing a lawsuit from a CPC that had been identified by the city attorney as advertising deceptively.[128][129]

California's 2015 Reproductive FACT Act requires CPCs without medical licenses to post signs saying that they are not licensed medical facilities and have no medical professionals providing or supervising services; CPCs must also let clients know about the state's public programs for reproductive health care.[130][131] The law was challenged in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, argued at the Supreme Court on March 20, 2018, with the Court required to decide whether or not the disclosures required by the California Reproductive FACT Act violated the free speech clause of the First Amendment.[132] The Court ruled on June 26, 2018, in a 5–4 decision that the notices required by the FACT Act violate the First Amendment by targeting speakers rather than speech.[133]

On March 30, 2006, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and eleven co-sponsors first introduced a bill called the "Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act", which would have required the Federal Trade Commission to "promulgate rules prohibiting...persons from advertising with the intent to deceptively create the impression that such persons provide abortion services" and "enforce violations of such rules as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices."[134][135] Maloney and her colleagues have re-introduced the bill in several Congresses,[54][136] most recently in May 2013, in the 113th Congress.[137]

In July 2006, Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) and his minority members' staff in the House Committee on Government Reform published "False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers", which contested the scientific accuracy of the information provided by a Bush Administration priority: federally funded "pregnancy resource centers". Since 2001, pregnancy resource centers had received over $30 million in federal funding. Most of this money had come from federal programs for abstinence-only education. Additional funding has been distributed as "capacity-building" grants to 25 pregnancy resource centers in 15 states as part of the new $150 million Compassion Capital Fund. For this report, female investigators telephoned the 25 pregnancy resource centers that had received grants from the Compassion Capital Fund, requesting information and advice regarding an unintended pregnancy. According to their findings, 20 of the 23 centers (87%) provided false or misleading information about the health effects of abortion.[138]

In 2002, after an investigation and subpoenas of a number of New York State CPCs alleged to be engaged in deceptive business practices,[139] then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's office worked out an agreement with one of the CPCs in question, intended to be used as a model, which sets out practices including informing clients that the center does not provide abortion or birth control, that it is not a licensed medical facility, and that the pregnancy tests it provides are over-the-counter.[140]

In the United Kingdom, the Advertising Standards Authority mandated in 2013 that the Central London Women's Centre must stop using "misleading" and "irresponsible" advertisements implying that it offered abortion services.[45]

Government support

As of July, 2006, 50 American CPCs had received federal funding.[70] Between 2001 and 2006, over $60 million in federal funds were given to crisis pregnancy centers, much of it coming from funding for abstinence-only programs provided under the conservative George W. Bush administration.[24]

Florida Choose Life tag

In 2006, 20 U.S. states subsidized crisis pregnancy centers.[5] These included Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Texas.[7] Efforts are led by anti-abortion Republicans.[141] Some CPCs in Canada have received funding from provincial governments.[142] In 29 U.S. states,[143] individuals can support CPCs by purchasing Choose Life license plates. Motorists in these states can request these plates and pay an extra fee, a portion of which is used by the state to fund adoption support organizations and crisis pregnancy centers.[144] In July 2013, then governor of Rhode Island Lincoln Chafee vetoed a bill for the license plates saying that in his opinion it violated the separation of church and state.[145]

Under the Trump administration, CPCs were encouraged to apply for Title X funding, which is intended to go to organisations offering family planning services. However, most struggled to qualify because offering hormonal birth control, which many CPCs oppose, is a requirement to receive the grants. One CPC organisation, The Obria Group, was awarded millions in grants in 2019 after promising to provide those services in some clinics, despite not currently offering them.[146][147][148]

Almost immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade, 38 Republican legislators in Wisconsin sent a letter to Governor Tony Evers, demanding that he provide $10 million in Federal ARPA funding to crisis pregnancy centers.[149]

Mandatory use of CPCs

South Dakota enacted a law in 2011 which would have required consultation at a crisis pregnancy center as a precondition to obtaining an abortion. The law, which was to take effect in July 2011, also would have established a 3-day waiting period, the longest in the country.[150] In June 2011, Judge Karen Schreier issued a preliminary injunction blocking the law from going into effect, writing that the provisions "constitute a substantial obstacle to a woman's decision to obtain an abortion because they force a woman against her will to disclose her decision to undergo an abortion to a pregnancy help center employee before she can undergo an abortion."[151] Although the law remains enjoined, the state later enacted another law which excluded weekends and holidays from the 72-hour waiting period mandated for a person seeking an abortion, potentially extending the wait for the procedure to six days, so that only days when CPCs were already open would count as part of the period.[152]

In some cases, judges responsible for granting judicial bypasses to minors have required them to go to a CPC for counseling before having an abortion.[153]

Confusion with government-supported centers in Ireland

In Ireland, centres not affiliated with the government exist that attempt to persuade women not to have an abortion. These have been reported to "use manipulation and alarmist information",[108][154] including false medical information,[56] and have been called "rogue agencies".[55][108][155]

The government's Crisis Pregnancy Programme (formerly Crisis Pregnancy Agency) funds crisis pregnancy initiatives and is in turn reimbursed by the Health Service Executive;[156] however, crisis pregnancy counseling grants, provided through a campaign called "Positive Options", are only awarded to centres that offer non-directive and medically accurate counselling that discusses all possible options, including travelling abroad for abortion.[108] Government sponsored centres' efforts to reduce the number of women who opt for abortion consist primarily of the provision of "services and supports which make other options more attractive."[156] A survey by the CPP found that 4 in 46 women surveyed encountered a "rogue agency" when seeking counseling.[157] The Department of Health does not regulate the anti-abortion agencies, since the 1995 Abortion Information Act, which establishes that Irish women have a right to know about abortion services abroad and which regulates providers of information, does not apply to centres that do not provide information on abortion.[109][158]

The term "crisis pregnancy" is used by abortion-rights agencies like the Irish Family Planning Association.[159]

Post-2016 attacks and vandalism against CPCs

Some CPCs have been damaged or destroyed in several types of incidents, with some directly attributed to criminal action and others spurring further investigation. A suspected arson attack in 2016 against a CPC in Albuquerque, New Mexico, led to an FBI investigation; among the possibilities the FBI was investigating that the fire was a hate crime.[160] On 1 February 2019, a CPC in Culpeper, Virginia, was vandalized with spray painted phrases that included "'fake,' 'you hate women,' and other vulgarities", spurring a police investigation.[161] An arson attack against a Peoria, Illinois, CPC on 3 May 2021 caused $250,000 in damages. This attack came shortly after the declassification of a Department of Homeland Security document that categorized both anti-abortion and pro-abortion rights "extremists" as "domestic violent extremist groups".[162]

In the month following the May 2022 publication of a leaked draft opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization U.S. Supreme Court case, several instances of violence against crisis pregnancy centers were reported by the Department of Homeland Security. The DHS issued a memo following the ruling's official release in June that cited these incidents as the basis for warning of potential violence extending "for weeks" following the overturn of Roe v. Wade while simultaneously affirming that "freedom of speech and right to peacefully protest are fundamental Constitutional rights."[163] On 25 June, several days following the ruling's release, a fire at a Longmont, Colorado, Christian pregnancy center caused "fire and heavy smoke damage" with no injuries. Graffiti at the scene read "If abortions aren’t safe, neither are you." The fire has been investigated with FBI assistance as an arson attack.[164] Employees of the center accused "pro-abortion" militant organization Jane's Revenge of starting the fire.[165]

Additional suspected incidents of arson against crisis pregnancy centers and anti-abortion groups had been reported before the ruling was announced. In May, Jane's Revenge had claimed responsibility for an arson attack against a Madison, Wisconsin, "Judeo-Christian" anti-abortion office.[166] Following the Madison attack, two firefighters were injured responding to a suspected arson attack at an Buffalo, New York-area Christian pregnancy center in early June.[167] A few days later, the ATF and Oregon authorities investigated a fire "suspicious in nature" that damaged a Christian pregnancy center in Gresham on 10 June.[168] "'Thousands' of dollars" of damage to a Southfield, Michigan, CPC on 16 September was attributed to Jane's Revenge.[169] Catholic News Agency reported that there were 82 total instances of abortion-rights-related vandalism, theft, and arson between early May and 22 July 2022. Of these, 50 were against pregnancy centers.[170]

See also

References
  1. Conley, James (February 9, 2021). "Bishop Conley: Women's Care Center is a Great Gift to Lincoln which Saves Lives" (Interview). Interviewed by Russ Barger. Lincoln, Nebraska: Lincoln Right to Life. Retrieved October 27, 2022. It's right across the street from Planned Parenthood, an abortion clinic. Which is another reason why they came here; they always like to be as close as they can to an abortion facility.
  2. "About Us". Heartbeat International. Archived from the original on May 31, 2012. Retrieved 2010-11-26.
  3. Brown, Lauretta (July 8, 2022). "Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers Help Women – Why Are They Being Targeted?". National Catholic Register.
  4. Pavone, Frank (March 20, 2018). "Why should a pro-life pregnancy center be forced to advertise abortion?". The Washington Post.
  5. Chandler, Michael Alison (2006-09-09). "Antiabortion Centers Offer Sonograms to Further Cause". The Washington Post. p. html. Retrieved 2008-02-24.
  6. Bazelon, Emily (2007-01-21). "Is There a Post-Abortion Syndrome?". The New York Times. p. cover story. Retrieved 2007-11-06.
  7. Simon, Stephanie (February 12, 2007). "Abortion foes are getting public funds". San Francisco Chronicle.
  8. "The Truth About "Crisis Pregnancy Center"" (PDF). Lansdowne, VA: Care Net. 2019. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  9. Redden, Molly (12 October 2015). "One State Finally Cracked Down on Deceptive Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers". Mother Jones.
  10. Smith, Joanna (August 7, 2010). "Deception used in counselling women against abortion". Toronto Star.
  11. Bryant AG, Levi EE; Levi (July 2012). "Abortion misinformation from crisis pregnancy centers in North Carolina". Contraception. 86 (6): 752–6. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.06.001. PMID 22770790.
  12. Rowlands S (2011). "Misinformation on abortion". Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 16 (4): 233–40. doi:10.3109/13625187.2011.570883. PMID 21557713. S2CID 13500769.
  13. Bryant-Comstock, Katelyn; Bryant, Amy G.; Narasimhan, Subasri; Levi, Erika E. (February 2016). "Information about Sexual Health on Crisis Pregnancy Center Web Sites: Accurate for Adolescents?". Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. 29 (1): 22–25. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2015.05.008. PMID 26493590.
  14. Eisenberg, Rebecca (1994). "Beyond Bray: Obtaining Federal Jurisdiction to Stop Anti-Abortion Violence". Yale Journal of Law and Feminism. 6 (1): 167–170. Originally written in late 1992 for Harvard Law School.
  15. Multiple sources:
  16. Multiple sources:
    • Dawson, Bethany (2022-08-21). "Fake abortion clinics now outnumber real ones 3 to 1, campaigners say, as pro-life activists try to pressure and shame women into abandoning terminations". Insider Inc. Fake abortion clinics that try to trick pregnant women in states where abortion is now banned and are searching online for termination options were given an unprecedented boost after Roe v Wade was overturned earlier this year, campaigners argue. Research shows that thousands of clinics posing as health centers offering abortions are ideological pro-life hubs that aim to pressure and shame pregnant women into abandoning their termination plans.
    • Goodwin, Shaun (2022-06-21). "Anti-abortion 'fake clinics' exist in Idaho. Here's what they are and how to spot them". Idaho Statesman. A “fake clinic,” also known as a crisis pregnancy center, is a clinic that advertises services similar to an abortion clinic, but with a different agenda. Instead of performing abortion services, the staff talks women through their options but ultimately attempts to discourage them from having an abortion. Fake clinics are often set up close to abortion clinics, according to Planned Parenthood, and advertise a range of services such as STD testing, but more often than not do not provide any substantive health care services. Although not outwardly offering abortion services, the clinics will advertise solutions for unintended pregnancies, pregnancy consultation and post-abortion care.
  17. Multiple sources:
    • Solis, Marie (2017-11-10). "Massachusetts Women's Health Center Actually a Fake Abortion Clinic, Says Watchdog Group". Newsweek. A Massachusetts health clinic is posing as an abortion provider to deliberately deceive women into not terminating pregnancies, a pro-choice group claims. The Attleboro Women's Health Center does not provide abortions, but rather uses underhanded tactics in attempts to prevent them, according to the Campaign for Accountability, which filed a complaint on Thursday with the state's attorney general. The health center's website prominently features headings on the "abortion pill" and "surgical abortion," includes extensive information on both pregnancy-terminating methods and offers the option of making an appointment at the top of the page. The site even includes price estimates for abortion procedures and advertises free abortion consultations. Users have to scour the site to find out that it actually does "not offer, recommend or refer for abortions or abortifacients."
    • "NARAL identifies 59 'fake' abortion clinics in Virginia". 2020-09-16. NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia released the findings of a decade-long study examining the strategies of "fake" abortion clinics known as "crisis pregnancy centers." The study identified 59 "fake clinics" throughout the Commonwealth, compared to only 16 licensed abortion providers. "Fake clinics" are not-for-profit centers that often advertise free pregnancy tests and other services to people facing unplanned pregnancies while "deceptively promoting an anti-abortion, anti-reproductive rights agenda."{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  18. Gibbs, Nancy (February 15, 2007). "The Grass-Roots Abortion War". Time. Archived from the original on February 18, 2007.
  19. Kimport, Katrina; Kriz, Rebecca; Roberts, Sarah C.M. (July 2018). "The prevalence and impacts of crisis pregnancy center visits among a population of pregnant women". Contraception. 98 (1): 69–73. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2018.02.016. ISSN 0010-7824. PMID 29505747. S2CID 4585318.
  20. Jones, Rachel K.; Witwer, Elizabeth; Jerman, Jenna (2019-09-18). "Abortion Incidence and Service Availability in the United States, 2017". doi:10.1363/2019.30760. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  21. Mehler Paperny, Anna (May 20, 2016). "Crisis pregnancy centres mislead women, report says". Global News. Retrieved 2020-04-19.
  22. "Worldwide Directory of Pregnancy Help". www.heartbeatinternational.org. Retrieved 2020-04-19.
  23. Albaladejo, Angelika (2017-10-26). "US groups pour millions into anti-abortion campaign in Latin America and Caribbean". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2020-04-15.
  24. Edsall, Thomas B. (2006-03-22). "Grants Flow To Bush Allies On Social Issues". The Washington Post. pp. A01. Retrieved 2007-11-06.
  25. Ludden, Jennifer (March 9, 2015). "States Fund Pregnancy Centers That Discourage Abortion". NPR.
  26. AP (21 September 1991). "Congressional Inquiry Examines Reports of Bogus Abortion Clinics". The New York Times. Retrieved 17 August 2013.
  27. Lewin, Tamar (April 22, 1994). "Anti-Abortion Center's Ads Ruled Misleading". The New York Times.
  28. Silverstein, Helena (2007). Girls on the stand: how courts fail pregnant minors. NYU Press. p. 200. ISBN 9780814740316.
  29. NIFLA Archived August 19, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  30. Morrison, Jill (2019). "Resuscitating the Black Body: Reproductive Justice as Resistance to the State's Property Interest in Black Women's Reproductive Capacity". Yale Journal of Law and Feminism. 31: 35–56.
  31. Griswold, Eliza (November 11, 2019). "The New Front Line of the Anti-Abortion Movement". The New Yorker. Retrieved September 23, 2022.
  32. "A Passion to Serve: A Vision for Life" – Pregnancy Resource Center Service Report 2009 Family Research Council. 2009. Page 6. Retrieved May 5, 2011
  33. Goers, Beth (October 23, 2008). "Pregnant? Worried?". Connect Savannah.
  34. Banerjee, Neela (2 February 2005). "Church Groups Turn to Sonogram to Turn Women From Abortions". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  35. Cooperman, Alan (February 21, 2002). "Abortion Battle: Prenatal Care or Pressure Tactics?". Washington Post. Archived from the original on September 24, 2015.
  36. Leland, John (16 January 2006). "Some Abortion Foes Forgo Politics for Quiet Talk". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  37. Solow, Barbara (June 18, 2003). "Medicine or ministry?". Independent Weekly.
  38. "Arkansas Right To Life – Abortion Alternatives Adoption Help Pregnancy Centers". Artl.org. 2011-02-04. Archived from the original on 2011-07-25. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
  39. "Celebrate Sanctity of Human Life Week with K-LIFE! | K-LIFE FM". Klife.org. 2010-01-15. Archived from the original on 2011-01-06. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
  40. Mandated Reporting Archived December 1, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  41. Swartzendruber, Andrea; English, Abigail; Greenberg, Katherine Blumoff; Murray, Pamela J.; Freeman, Matt; Upadhya, Krishna; Simpson, Tina; Miller, Elizabeth; Santelli, John (2019-12-01). "Crisis Pregnancy Centers in the United States: Lack of Adherence to Medical and Ethical Practice Standards; A Joint Position Statement of the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine and the North American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology". Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. 32 (6): 563–566. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2019.10.008. ISSN 1083-3188. PMID 31679958. S2CID 207897778.
  42. Kaufman, Marc (18 July 2006). "Pregnancy Centers Found to Give False Information on Abortion". The Washington Post. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  43. Silverman, Julia (9 May 2007). "States React to Crisis Pregnancy Centers". The Washington Post. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  44. "Abortion Services, Pregnancy Advice, Counselling and Contraception – BPAS". www.bpas.org.
  45. Lydall, Ross (February 11, 2014). "Clinics "tell women that abortions cause cancer"". London Evening Standard. p. 10.
  46. "Boy given up in LC's first Safe Haven case (3/12) : Headline News". Americanpress.com. Archived from the original on 2011-07-07. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
  47. The Columbus Dispatch January 20, 2008, "Pregnancy centers stir debate"
  48. Roberts, Sarah C. M.; Kimport, Katrina; Kriz, Rebecca; Holl, Jennifer; Mark, Katrina; Williams, Valerie (2019-12-01). "Consideration of and Reasons for Not Obtaining Abortion Among Women Entering Prenatal Care in Southern Louisiana and Baltimore, Maryland". Sexuality Research and Social Policy. 16 (4): 476–487. doi:10.1007/s13178-018-0359-4. ISSN 1553-6610.
  49. Focus on the Family Budgets $4.2M To Provide Ultrasound Equipment to Pregnancy Centers With Goal of Preventing Abortions Archived October 4, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  50. Focus Celebrates Option Ultrasound Success, Focus On the Family
  51. "Home".
  52. "Crisis Pregnancy Centers in the U.S.: Lack of Adherence to Medical and Ethical Practice Standards: A Joint Position Statement of the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine and the North American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology". Journal of Adolescent Health. 65 (6): 821–824. December 1, 2019.
  53. "Health Highlights: July 18, 2006". HealthDay. July 18, 2006. Retrieved February 27, 2022.
  54. Jarvis, Jan (September 13, 2010). "Advertising practices of crisis pregnancy centers raise concerns". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Archived from the original on June 28, 2018.
  55. Bradley, Lara (July 16, 2006). "Counsellor offered shock anti-abortion propaganda". The Irish Independent.
  56. Hough, Jennifer (October 6, 2008). "Subverting the right to choose" (PDF). Irish Examiner. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 25, 2015.
  57. "Abortion, Miscarriage, and Breast Cancer Risk". National Cancer Institute. 20 February 2003. Retrieved 2011-01-11.
  58. Smith, Jordan (August 4, 2006). "Having Your Baby". Austin Chronicle.
  59. "5 news undercover". Five News. Sky News. Archived from the original on 2021-12-21. Retrieved 2010-12-07.
  60. "Abortion scandal: women told terminations increase chance of child abuse". Daily Telegraph. London. 10 February 2014. Archived from the original on February 10, 2014. Retrieved 11 February 2014.
  61. Stotland NL (2003). "Abortion and psychiatric practice". J Psychiatr Pract. 9 (2): 139–49. doi:10.1097/00131746-200303000-00005. PMID 15985924. S2CID 37575499. "Currently, there are active attempts to convince the public and women considering abortion that abortion frequently has negative psychiatric consequences. This assertion is not borne out by the literature: the vast majority of women tolerate abortion without psychiatric sequelae."
  62. Stotland NL (October 1992). "The myth of the abortion trauma syndrome". JAMA. 268 (15): 2078–9. doi:10.1001/jama.268.15.2078. PMID 1404747.
  63. Kelly, Kimberly (February 2014). "The spread of 'Post Abortion Syndrome' as social diagnosis". Social Science & Medicine. 102: 18–25. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.11.030. PMID 24565137.
  64. Casey, PR (August 2010). "Abortion among young women and subsequent life outcomes". Best Practice & Research. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 24 (4): 491–502. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2010.02.007. hdl:10197/5799. PMID 20303829. S2CID 23052359.
  65. Russo NF, Denious JE (2005). "Controlling birth: science, politics, and public policy". J Soc Issues. 61 (1): 181–91. doi:10.1111/j.0022-4537.2005.00400.x. PMID 17073030.
  66. Dadlez, E.M.; Andrews, William L. (7 July 2009). "Post-Abortion Syndrome: Creating an Affliction". Bioethics. 24 (9): 445–452. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01739.x. PMID 19594725. S2CID 205564834.
  67. Gross, Jane (1987-01-23). "Pregnancy Centers: Anti-Abortion Role Challenged". The New York Times. Retrieved 2007-11-06.
  68. Upadhyay UD, Desai S, Zlidar V, Weitz TA, Grossman D, Anderson P, Taylor D (2015). "Incidence of emergency department visits and complications after abortion". Obstet Gynecol. 125 (1): 175–83. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000000603. PMID 25560122. S2CID 42219844.
  69. Bohan, Christine (August 19, 2007). "Clashes at crisis pregnancy clinic". Sunday Tribune. Archived from the original on 2016-03-06.
  70. Committee on Government Reform—Minority Staff Special Investigations Division (July 2006). False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers (PDF). United States House of Representatives. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-05-04. Retrieved 2011-01-16.
  71. Bryant AG, Levi EE (December 2012). "Abortion misinformation from crisis pregnancy centers in North Carolina". Contraception. 86 (6): 752–6. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.06.001. PMID 22770790.
  72. Beusman, Callie (31 May 2017). "How Anti-Abortion Zealots Pose as Medical Professionals to Trick Pregnant Women". Broadly. Vice.
  73. "Crisis Pregnancy Centers Lie" (PDF). NARAL Pro-Choice America.
  74. Net, Care. "About". www.care-net.org.
  75. NIFLA Christian Archived December 1, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  76. "New Fronts in the Abortion Battle". Time. Archived from the original on October 9, 2010. Retrieved 2010-11-26.
  77. "Care Net: About Us". Care Net. Retrieved 2010-11-25.
  78. "Care Net: Inside a Care Net Center". Care Net. Archived from the original on October 26, 2014. Retrieved 2010-11-26.
  79. "Sponsorships" (PDF). Heartbeat International. p. 2. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 3, 2018. Retrieved 2010-12-06.
  80. Daly, Rich (August 9, 2010). "Crisis-Pregnancy Centers: 'A Way to Shut Us Down'". National Catholic Register.
  81. New York Media, LLC (September 18, 1989). "Abortion in New York". New York Magazine: 37.
  82. "About Us – Life International". Life International. Archived from the original on 2010-05-07. Retrieved 2010-11-29.
  83. "Biblical Foundation for the Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Greater Phoenix". Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Greater Phoenix, Inc. Archived from the original on 2007-10-21. Retrieved 2010-11-29.
  84. "Birthright International – Philosophy". Birthright International. Archived from the original on June 28, 2018. Retrieved June 24, 2016.
  85. Breger, Sarah (June 16, 2010). "In Shifra's Arms". Washington Jewish Week. Archived from the original on 2010-12-29.
  86. Resnick, Sofia (24 April 2012). "Taxpayer-Funded Crisis Pregnancy Centers Using Religion To Oppose Abortion". The American Independent. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  87. "Care Net Affiliation Application". Care Net. Archived from the original on 2010-12-04. Retrieved 2010-11-27.
  88. "Standards of Affiliation". Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services. Retrieved 2010-11-29.
  89. Resnick, Sofia (April 24, 2012). "Jobs for Christians". The American Independent. Archived from the original on June 8, 2012.
  90. About Southside Pregnancy Archived May 3, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  91. "Crisis Pregnancy Centre – Volunteer". Crisis Pregnancy Centre of Winnipeg. Archived from the original on 2010-09-17. Retrieved 2010-11-29.
  92. "How to Volunteer with the Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Greater Phoenix". Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Greater Phoenix, Inc. Archived from the original on 2007-10-21. Retrieved 2010-11-29.
  93. "Values Statement". Bethany Christian Services. Archived from the original on 2011-07-19. Retrieved 2011-03-21.
  94. Dupuy, Tina (April 16, 2009). "Babies & Bibles". Pasadena Weekly.
  95. Zeveloff, Naomi (May 24, 2007). "Mom's the word". Colorado Springs Independent.
  96. Jones, Mark (March 15, 2010). "Pregnancy crisis centres for women in Wiltshire". BBC News. BBC.
  97. "About CareConfidential". CareConfidential. Retrieved 2010-11-28.
  98. "Welcome to the Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services". Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services. Retrieved 2010-11-28.
  99. "International abortion awareness and pro life programs from HLI". Human Life International. Archived from the original on 2010-12-30. Retrieved 2010-11-30.
  100. "Cams Latinoamericana". CAMS. Archived from the original on 2011-01-20. Retrieved 2010-11-30.
  101. "Largest crisis pregnancy care centers not clamoring for proposed sonogram grants". Archived from the original on November 4, 2014.
  102. "About Us". Heartbeat International. Archived from the original on June 3, 2009. Retrieved 2013-06-20.
  103. "Exclusive: Trump-linked religious 'extremists' target women with disinformation worldwide". openDemocracy. Retrieved 2020-04-15.
  104. "ABORTION: False Advertising". Time. October 2, 1986. Archived from the original on June 29, 2011.
  105. McDonough, Katie (April 28, 2014). "Google will take down deceptive ads for crisis pregnancy centers". Salon.
  106. Greenwald, Marilyn S.; Bernt, Joseph (2000). The big chill: investigative reporting in the current media environment. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 191. ISBN 0-8138-2805-8.
  107. ""She said abortion could cause breast cancer": a report on the lies, manipulations and privacy violations of crisis pregnancy centers in New York City" (PDF). NARAL Pro-Choice New York; National Institute for Reproductive Health. October 2010. Retrieved 2013-06-27.
  108. "Your Options: Parenting, Adoption, or Abortion". Pact. Archived from the original on 14 May 2013. Retrieved 2011-03-01.
  109. Ryan, Carol (June 29, 2010). "Alarm over pregnancy advice by 'rogue' agencies". The Irish Times.
  110. Belluck, Pam (2013-01-04). "Pregnancy Centers Gain Influence in Anti-Abortion Arena". The New York Times. Retrieved 2013-01-08.
  111. Meaghan Winter (6 Apr 2015). ""Save the Mother, Save the Baby": An Inside Look at a Pregnancy Center Conference". Cosmopolitan.
  112. Gans, Jared (2022-08-25). "Google to clearly label facilities that provide abortions". The Hill (newspaper). The lawmakers said in the letter that 37 percent of Google Maps results and 11 percent of search results for “abortion clinics near me” and “abortion pill” in states with abortion trigger bans were for anti-abortion clinics. A Google spokesperson told The Hill that the company has been working for months to find more useful ways to display results that show the specific services that businesses offer.
  113. "Warner, Slotkin, Colleagues Urge Action on Misleading Search Results About Abortion Clinics". 2022-06-17.
  114. Ingram, David (2022-08-25). "Google overhauls its search results for abortion clinics after leading some users astray - The tech company said it was updating its map and search apps to include verified labels such as "Provides abortions" or "Might not provide abortions."". NBC News.
  115. Goldberg, Noah (2022-08-26). "Google will label which health clinics provide abortions". Los Angeles Times.
  116. Halpert, Madeline (2022-08-25). "Google Will Label Verified Abortion Clinics In Search Results". Forbes.
  117. Korn, Jennifer (2022-08-23). "Yelp to begin prominently labeling crisis pregnancy centers to avoid confusion". CNN. “It’s well-reported that crisis pregnancy centers do not offer abortion services, and it’s been shown that many provide misleading information in an attempt to steer people seeking abortion care to other options,” wrote Malik. “With this new consumer notice we’re aiming to further protect consumers from the potential of being misled or confused.”
  118. Fargo Women's Health Organization v. Larson, 381 N.W.2d 177 (North Dakota Supreme Court January 7, 1986).
  119. "Judge Blocks City’s Crisis Pregnancy Center Law", D. Chen, The New York Times, July 13, 2011
  120. Schoenberg, Tom (June 27, 2012). "Christian Pregnancy Center Freed From Abortion Postings". Businessweek. Archived from the original on June 1, 2013.
  121. O'Dell, Larry (December 7, 2012). "Appeals court rehears Md. pregnancy center cases". Associated Press. Archived from the original on June 24, 2013.
  122. Chen, Alice (22 May 2013). "Crisis Pregnancy Centers: Impeding the right to informed decision making" (PDF). Cardozo Journal of Law & Gender. 19: 933–960. Archived from the original (PDF) on April 25, 2018.
  123. Coppola, Sarah (January 26, 2012). "City repeals, replaces sign ordinance for pregnancy centers". Austin American-Statesman. Archived from the original on April 10, 2018.
  124. Finnell, Shannon (April 4, 2013). "Senate Bill Targets Pregnancy Centers". Eugene Weekly.
  125. Mapes, Jeff (April 2, 2013). "In socially liberal Northwest, it is abortion foes who are playing defense". The Oregonian.
  126. "Relating to disclosure of health services; and declaring an emergency". 24 June 2013. Archived from the original on 24 June 2013.
  127. Redden, Molly (December 8, 2011). "A Promising New Law That Pushes Back Against Deceptive Anti-Abortion Centers". The New Republic.
  128. Wilkey, Robin (October 8, 2012). "Crisis Pregnancy Center Denied Constitutionality Challenge Against San Francisco Ordinance". Huffington Post.
  129. Melendez, Lyanne (August 2, 2011). "City attorney Dennis Herrera goes after First Resort". ABC 7. Archived from the original on June 24, 2013. Retrieved November 17, 2019.
  130. Lithwick, Dahlia (October 20, 2015). "A Woman's Right to Know". Slate.
  131. "Should Pro-Life Clinics Have to Post Information About Abortion?". The Atlantic. 19 March 2018.
  132. "National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra".
  133. "Supreme Court Sides With California Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers". NPR.org. Retrieved 2018-06-26.
  134. "Seeking a Crackdown on Deceit by Radical Anti-Choice Centers". Rep. Carolyn Maloney press release. 2006-03-30. Retrieved 2006-05-11.
  135. "H.R. 5052 [109th] – Summary: Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act". GovTrack.us. 2006-03-30. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
  136. "H.R. 5052 [109th]: Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act". GovTrack.us. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
    "H.R. 2478 [110th]: Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act". GovTrack.us. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
    "H.R. 5652 [111th]: Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act". GovTrack.us. 2010-06-30. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
    "S. 3554 [111th]: Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women's Services Act of 2010". GovTrack.us. 2010-06-30. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
  137. Kasperowicz, Pete (20 May 2013). "Dems look to crack down on anti-abortion 'crisis pregnancy centers'".
  138. Waxman, Henry (July 2016). "False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers" (PDF). Consumer Health Sourcebook. United States House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 18, 2018. Retrieved 25 April 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  139. Tilghman, Nancy (February 24, 2002). "Dillon and Spitzer Clash Over Abortion". The New York Times.
  140. "SPITZER REACHES AGREEMENT WITH UPSTATE CRISIS PREGNANCY CENTER" (Press release). Office of the Attorney General of New York. February 28, 2002. Archived from the original on 2010-11-22. Retrieved 2010-12-08.
  141. Manes, Billy (February 26, 2009). "NEWS+FEATURES: Immaculate deception". Orlandoweekly.com. Archived from the original on September 27, 2015. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
  142. Arthur, Joyce (January 2009). "Exposing Crisis Pregnancy Centres in British Columbia" (PDF). Pro-Choice Action Network.
  143. "'Choose Life' License Plate Vetoed By Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee". Huffington Post. AP. July 17, 2013. Archived from the original on March 5, 2016.
  144. "Choose Life". Retrieved 2010-12-19.
  145. AP (17 July 2013). "Rhode Island governor vetoes 'Choose Life' license plates". Fox News. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  146. "Trump administration awards $1.7 million family planning grant to anti-abortion group". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2019-05-13.
  147. Colliver, Victoria. "Anti-abortion clinics caught in tumult over Trump family planning rules". POLITICO. Retrieved 2019-05-13.
  148. Colliver, Victoria. "Anti-abortion clinics tapping into federal funds under Trump". POLITICO. Retrieved 2019-05-14.
  149. Fannon, Emilee (June 29, 2022). "GOP lawmakers ask Gov. Evers for $10M to aid pregnancy centers". CBS 58 News. WDJT-TV. Retrieved July 1, 2022.
  150. Sulzberger, A. G. (March 22, 2011). "Women Seeking Abortions in South Dakota to Get Anti-Abortion Advice". The New York Times. Retrieved March 23, 2011.
  151. Bailey, David (June 30, 2011). "Federal judge blocks South Dakota abortion law". Reuters.
  152. Bailey, David (March 8, 2013). "South Dakota governor signs extended abortion wait period law". Reuters.
  153. Silverstein, Helena (2007). Girls on the Stand: How Courts Fail Pregnant Minors. NYU Press. ISBN 9780814740316.
  154. Topping, Alexandra (28 January 2010). "Ireland accused of exposing women to anti-abortion lies". The Guardian. London.
  155. Maguire, Siobhan; McDonald, Dearbhail (July 9, 2006). "Women 'duped by bogus agencies'". Sunday Times. Archived from the original on June 29, 2011.
  156. "About Us". Crisis Pregnancy Programme. Archived from the original on 2010-08-17. Retrieved 2010-12-25.
  157. Conlon, Catherine. "Mixed Methods Research of Crisis Pregnancy Counselling and Support Services" (PDF). Crisis Pregnancy Programme. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 18, 2007.
  158. "V. Obstacles to Abortion Access for Women Living in Ireland". A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland. Human Rights Watch. January 28, 2010.
  159. "Men & Crisis Pregnancy". Irish Family Planning Association. Archived from the original on May 28, 2018. Retrieved 9 March 2017.
  160. Kaplan, Elise (23 November 2016). "Fires heavily damage anti-abortion ministry in ABQ; FBI investigation launched". Albuquerque Journal. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  161. Say, Jeff (1 February 2019). "Pregnancy Centers of Central Virginia in Culpeper vandalized Friday morning". InsideNova. Culpeper, VA: Culpeper Times. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  162. Wood, Emily (7 May 2021). "Pro-life pregnancy center set on fire in act of arson, investigators say". The Christian Post. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  163. Alvarez, Priscilla (24 June 2022). "DHS warns of potential violent extremist activity in response to abortion ruling". CNN. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  164. Grewe, Lindsey (27 June 2022). "Fire at Colorado pregnancy center being investigated as arson in wake of Roe v. Wade reversal". KKTV. Longmont, CO. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  165. Whaley, Monte. "Employees say Longmont ministry torched by pro-abortion group". Longmont Leader. Longmont, CO.
  166. Luscombe, Richard (10 May 2022). "Pro-choice group claims arson attack on Wisconsin anti-abortion office". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  167. Folmar, Chloe (7 June 2022). "New York police investigating suspected arson at pregnancy center". The Hill. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  168. Knutson, Jacob (11 June 2022). "ATF investigating "suspicious" fire at Oregon pregnancy center". Axios. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  169. Wingblad, Aileen (21 September 2022). "Police: Pregnancy center hit by vandals, possible link to extremist group Jane's Revenge". The Oakland Press. Troy, MI. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  170. McKeown, Jonah (22 July 2022). "TRACKER: Pro-abortion attacks in the U.S. continue (updated)". Catholic News Agency. St. Louis, MO. Archived from the original on 1 September 2022. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.