As a Christian, a pro-lifer and a journalist, I'm ambivalent about the Planned Parenthood hidden camera sting that was perpetrated here in central New Jersey and reported sporadically by news outlets last week. The California based anti-abortion activist group Live Action sent two actors into a clinic posing as sex traffickers and recorded an employee doling out unethical, dangerous, and illegal advice that would keep the duo in business.
As a Christian I'm uncomfortable with both the failure of the office worker to report the couple to authorities and the entrapment of her by the activists. When is it appropriate to lie? The biblical stories of the midwives who refused to kill male infants as commanded by Egypt's pharaoh and Rahab's deception that saved Jewish spies in Jericho both seem to affirm lying when it's done to save lives, but I question whether or not any lives will be saved as a result of this action.
As a pro-lifer, I doubt this kind of activism ultimately advances the goal of reducing abortion. On one hand, undeniable truth is exposed. On the other, the bad will it inspires is a serious blow to the common ground efforts that I believe hold the best hope of actually bringing down the abortion rate in the United States. Also, as pro-lifer Rachael Laramore writes at Slate,
Planned Parenthood should be responsible for the actions of its employees. It should at least be held to the same standards that the left wants crisis-pregnancy centers held to -- no false advertising, no erroneous medical information. But it's extremely unlikely that there are multitudes of men walking into Planned Parenthood trying to get cheap abortions for their sex workers. And the young women who count on the group's cheap birth control will be the ones who are harmed if Planned Parenthood loses its federal funding.
As a journalist, I'm ambivalent about the use of hidden cameras and deception. At the journalism resource Poynter.org, several articles address the ethical problems inherent in using deception to reveal truth. When it comes to using hidden cameras, an article by Bob Steele offers the following factors to consider:
The Importance Threshold:
Since we are in the business of pursuing truth, there is more than a hint of hypocrisy when we use some form of deceit to pursue the truth. We can only justify that inconsistency and the use of deception when we truly serve a greater principle, such as pursuing a highly important and otherwise elusive truth. Therein lies the first standard for deciding when it is appropriate to use hidden cameras. To justify deception we must be pursuing exceptionally important information. It must be of vital public interest, such as preventing profound harm to individuals or revealing great system failure.
Tools of Last Resort:
This covert method of newsgathering amplifies any accusations we make. We must insure that the tone and emphasis of hidden camera video meet standards for factual accuracy and contextual authenticity.
Trinagulate & Test Assumptions:
We must devote enough resources, time and attention to gather the right facts and make sure our facts are right. We must supplement the surreptitious video with insightful observations, seeing and retaining important details of a scene that might not be captured by the camera.
Know and Respect the Law:
We must pay close attention to the legal land mines in hidden camera reporting. Stations must develop sound strategies that recognize matters of defamation and privacy, including false light and intrusion torts. We can be vigorous in our reporting if we are clear on the law regarding fraud, trespass and surreptitious recording of audio. The law appropriately protects citizens. We should honor the law while also responsibly serving the public.
Live Action's amateur investigative work meets the Importance Threshold in my opinion, but I'm not sure it meets the other three criteria. A quick search of the bios on its website reveals that no one on the leadership team has journalistic training. Their success causes me to not only question the veracity and ethics of the work, it makes me lament the fact that more professionals aren't doing excellent, unbiased reporting like this from ProPublica's Marian Wang.
In the New Jersey case, the first outcome is that one woman lost her job. While she seems incredibly callous in the video, I assume that hers is a tragically misguided attempt to minimize the consequences of sex trafficking on underage girls who are beyond her reach, or as a commenter at GetReligion suggests, perhaps to get them into the clinic away from the pimps so that they can be helped.
Hidden camera video doesn't reveal what is in a person's mind and I don't believe this is a singular story. The woman identified in the video as Amy Woodruff is culpable for her actions, but she has also become a convenient scapegoat. It's understandable that pro-life activists wouldn't be interested in what it means for Woodruff's family for her to lose a job they believe is immoral, but as a Christian I am concerned about the harm that was done to them in the name of the cause.
*Update: Three additional videos have been released from clinics in Virginia.
Follow Christine A. Scheller on Twitter: www.twitter.com/cascheller
Abortion debate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ten Arguments For Abortion and Against Abortion
Abortion Debate in America Reignited - CBS Evening News - CBS News
Abortion Debate Returns to Capitol Hill as Lawmakers Weigh New ...
Abortion - ReligiousTolerance.org by the Ontario Consultants on ...
Editorial - Laws, Lies and the Abortion Debate - NYTimes.com
Bronx, NYC, NY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCWf1MB92Pw
Perth Amboy, NJ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9Zj9yx2j0Y&feature=channel
Bloominton, Indiana
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9Zj9yx2j0Y&feature=channel
There are many more on Youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9Zj9yx2j0Y&feature=channel
"Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most
adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and
social problems.
"I think you must agree ... that the campaign for birth control is not
merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims
of eugenics ... Birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the
eugenic educator.”
-- Margaret Sanger. "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda."
Birth Control Review , October 1921, page 5.
"[Our objective is] unlimited sexual gratification without the burden
of unwanted children ...
-- Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel , Volume I, Number 1.
Reprinted in Woman and the New Race . New York: Brentanos Publishers,
1922.
"[Slavs, Latin, and Hebrew immigrants are] human weeds ... a
deadweight of human waste ... [Blacks, soldiers, and Jews are a] menace to
the race."
-- Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review .
... The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members
is to kill it."
-- Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel , Volume I, Number 1.
Reprinted in Woman and the New Race . New York: Brentanos Publishers,
1922.
This is the most oft used quote by thiests who oppose abortion.
Long before we are a twinkle in our mother and fathers eye we are being formed and shaped by society, just as they were, and their parents before them. The mother that we all have in common is mitochondria Eve, and the father, mitochondria Adam. It's a darned shame that scientists chose to use those two names, which by default deceptively and unjustly sanctions scripture as though it is called into being by some Absolute, and Inerrant Grand Conductor, rather then just one of many sources of wisdom from which to draw understanding of the society within which we find ourselves living amongst.
"We" shape one another for better or worse, atheist and theist alike. "We" are shaping and forming future generations, just as "we" were shaped and formed by past generations.
What are "we" shaping? Better or worse? No matter which side of the picket line of abortion "we" stand on, "we", not some illusive almighty, have to answer that question. "We" are the creators.
"We" have to ask ourselves, what are "we" creating when "we" allow young girls to be drug over the border and forced into sexual slavery. "We" have to ask ourselves what kind of society "we" are creating, when young boys and girls are tossed out onto the street, no education, and forced into sexual slavery/prostitution.
Misogynies worse and most deceptive practioner is women.
I followed the link you provided for the Princeton conference, and much appreciated the question of whether abortion is a matter for courts and legislatures. I don't think that's ultimately where there will be a sea change regarding abortion. I think the sea change will come precisely from changing hearts, not laws.
Full disclosure: I'm pro-choice, which does not equate with being pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice because I recognize the tragic circumstances of the lives of many (most? nearly all?) of the women who choose abortion. On the other hand, my life is well populated with people who very nearly were, or could have been, aborted--including a magnificent little sister with a range of serious birth defects. In this day and age, many women are likely to choose abortion on the basis of amniocentesis indicating the presence of birth defects. I would hope before they do that, they get to know a few people with major disabilities. I think most would opt to carry the pregnancy to term if they did that first.
Interesting statement from the article:
"They [Planned Parenthood spokesmen] said employees had long been trained to obey local reporting laws as well as to use common sense when confronted with evidence of the abuse of minors. "
And yet, I can't help but find it frightening that in both video's, despite their training, neither woman blinked when confronted by the pimps. They react as if this is not unusual as though they are having a conversation about the weather. If it is that PP needs to retrain staff, it begs the question what didn't they understand about their prior training? Did they not understand what abuse of minors is, or that they don't agree or care, when it comes to the sex slave industry.
Really? So you're saying that it's something you can't describe, nor believe in but you know roughly when it appears.
"a few-months-along fetus is not a human being, no matter how many believers in supernatural beings continue to assert that it is"
You have no more right than they do to determine when 'humanhood' is present.
Now, obviously Mr. Rileda is glaringly wrong; the medical reasons that you cite are a steel-trap of an example of when abortion is not only not wrong but actuall required. But the abortion debate is littered with people on both sides who don't seem to understand just how complicated and indiscreet the issue is. Personally, I'm pro-choice, for social reasons (possibly different ones than you) but I'm not about to tell people who are pro-life that they are wrong for their differing viewpoint.
There has never been any sort of religious or moral consensus as to when a human fetus is "ensouled" and therefore fully "human".
So for you to say that it happens at conception is as arbitrary as my insisting that it doesn't happen until there is fetal movement (The Quickening)....or that it doesn't happen until after birth.
I have no more right to impose MY views as to what the moral standard is here, than you have the right to impose your views upon me.
What bothers me about your article, though, is that I have not read anywhere else about that office worker who gave unethical, dangerous, and illegal advice. I hasten to add that my failure to have read about it doesn't mean it's not true! But what I have read is that in many other Planned Parenthood clinics where the "sting" was attempted, the staff refused to dispense any illegal advice and reported the statements by the "clients" that they were conducting illegal activities to the authorities (in this case, the FBI) as required by law. So, even if in a tiny handful (e.g., 1) of situations a single staffer did something illegal or unethical, that shouldn't be used to condemn the entire organization, the vast majority of whose staffers did the right, legal, safe, and ethical thing.
I share your belief that Planned Parenthood should be held to the same high standards that "the left wants crisis-pregnancy centers held to". And I'm very, very left myself. In this case, I think that Planned Parenthood has acted with very high standards. It's a shame that a staffer did not, perhaps due to inadequate training.
I have tried to verify that, but can't seem to find any reports that support the above statement. Could you provide a link, please?
I know there was another sting that occurred in VA, and the same thing happened, so no, it isn't just one.
I give kudo's to Live Action for exposing these two incidents of Planned Parenthood advising PIMPs.
I tried posting this previously, but it was rejected. I am not surprised.
There are the facts behind the hatchet job in question in the article here. Simple story the audio was edited to make the worker look as if she had done something wrong, in reality she followed the law to the letter.
A likely excuse, but it flies in the face of rational thought. How many do you think she could save?
One, to none.
First, it is highly unlikely that some young girl is going to come in and brazenly state, I am 14, more or less, and forced into prostitution, can you help me.
And if ONE did have that courage, and the people at PP did call the police, they would never see another one again............
What happened at PP is outrageous.
Notice that the woman at PP never broke a sweat as though she has had this conversation before.
She appeared frighteningly prepared and worse comfortable answering any and all questions the PIMP presented. Had it been the first time that she had ever been presented with what occured that day, one can "reasonably" assume, if assumptions are to be made, that there would have been some look of suprise, shock or repulsion, or at least a pause on the face of the woman at PP when presented such questions by the PIMP.
Also, it happened AGAIN in Virginia, where a PIMP was "coached" how to avoid the law.
Something is amiss at PP. Twice is no accident.