I was asked this morning about my take on the Komen situation: i.e. its reversal of decision to not give Planned Parenthood grants for breast health to its population of women in need.
In the last two days I’ve read a lot of angry commentary from the people who hated the original decision. I saw many lines that ended with “Komen will not get any of my money anymore.” To me, that line of thinking is as upsetting as Komen’s original decision.
Don’t get me wrong: I am glad Komen changed its mind. I am happy it heard the angry outcries. I am glad it decided it made a mistake. But I don’t like any conversation, conflict or combat that ends with “and now I hate you.” I don’t think quick decisions and pulling support for a 30 year organization over one poor decision advances anything positive. And I am all about positive.
Which I think officially makes me a milk toast. And my perspective could be dead wrong; maybe fighting and financial fist-a-cuffs is how any thing good gets done in this world.
But as I battle metastatic breast cancer, I have become more even-tempered. I am hyper-focused on solving problems, not battling them out. And like I just said, I’m not at all sure I’m right. So hooray that Komen changed its mind and kudos to all your reactions that helped it get there.
But I stand by my original reaction, which was this: maybe Komen should go find another way to help out the population that Planned Parenthood addresses. Remember, not all people who go to Planned Parenthood are asking for abortions. I have a friend who goes there because she can’t afford health insurance but wants to stay healthy for herself and her 12 year old son. There’s a broader non-politically-charged population there–and it needs breast care help. And that is the mantra of Susan G. Komen For The Cure: stopping women from dying of breast cancer.
I guess what I’m saying is maybe there’s a place for both reactions: the “screw you I’m taking my money and walking” one and the “okay, if you can’t help one way, figure out another way to help.”
To that end, here’s an idea: maybe Planned Parenthood–and what it does to help a large group of women who find themselves without healthcare insurance but in need of health care–shouldn’t be the only game in town. Maybe the world shouldn’t be considering financially challenged women and ones-who-want abortions as the same focus group. After all, my friend doesn’t go to PP for an abortion. She goes to maintain herself as a healthy parent.
I have no idea what the real reasons were that caused Komen to pull, then reinstated its PP funding–I assume it was political, and twas ever thus. But today, Komen is once again giving money to Planned Parenthood as it aways “planned” to do. Which I am happy about for many women, including my friend. But since “plan” keeps coming up in this conversation, how about Komen plan to figure out how to take its money and give breast health to women in need on its own?
How about Komen side-stepping this entire problem in the future by teflon-coating itself against political pressure forever? How about a new wing of Komen called something like–and I’m making this up here– “Planned Parent”? Or better yet, “Planned Prime-Of-Life”? With the objective of reaching the underprivileged women out there who don’t want an abortion but who want not to die of breast cancer? With the secondary strategy to live to see a child graduate high school, and the third objective to live long enough to be a parent in the first place?
Since we’re talking about plans in the first place, how about that for a plan, Komen?