It has been reported that CPCs are storefronts that use false and misleading advertising and the offer of free pregnancy tests or other services to lure women into their offices. Then their goal is to dissuade women from exercising their right to choose.

While some CPCs may provide appropriate support and information to women facing unintended pregnancies, many do not. Many CPCs intentionally misinform and mislead women seeking pregnancy-related information.(3) In fact, some CPCs may force women to watch anti-abortion films, slide shows, photographs, and hear biased lectures.(4) No CPC will refer women to an abortion provider – and in fact, some may refuse even to provide information about or referrals for birth control.(5) These practices block women from making fully informed choices about their reproductive health and may endanger women’s health by delaying access to legitimate health-care services.

A CPC’s ideal client is a woman facing an unintended pregnancy who is seeking information about all her options but does not have access to a regular doctor or health center. CPCs recognize that if they are up front about the limited nature of their services and their ideological agenda, they will lose this constituency. Instead, to attract women who are undecided or considering abortion, CPCs often present themselves as comprehensive health-care providers. Their misleading practices may include questionable advertising tactics, providing dishonest or evasive answers when women call to inquire about their services or even selecting confusing locations or names that obscure their true agenda. Below are just a few examples of the deceptive practices used by CPCs.

The deception often starts at a woman’s first step in her search for information: Internet searches and advertisements.

• Some CPCs list themselves in phone books or online directories under the headings "abortion," "abortion alternatives," "abortion services," "family-planning information centers," or "women’s organizations" to appear as though they offer abortion care or counseling, even though the only "abortion service" they provide is anti-abortion coercion. (9)
• One of the most potent tools that CPCs have at their disposal is the Option Line, a joint venture between Care Net and Heartbeat International that operates as a 24-hour call center and web tool that transfers or refers women to the nearest CPC. During its first month in operation, the Option Line received approximately 2,000 calls and since then has added instant messaging and email capabilities to its arsenal. Its operators boast that the service answers more than 600 contacts a day and Option Line claims more than two million contacts since 2003. (10) Further, a web search revealed that many CPCs listed by Option Line advertised under headings that could lead women to believe that they provide the full range of reproductive-health services, including abortion care and contraception.(11)
• Heartbeat International’s website promotes its Extend Web Services program by promising CPCs that "this effective web presence allows centers to compete online with abortion providers." (12) One result of this strategy was that a Google search of "abortion clinic" resulted 79 percent of the time in ads funded by CPCs. (13) (In response to this discovery, in 2014 NARAL Pro-Choice America worked with Google and Yahoo to remove the ads to ensure truth in advertising on these search engines.(14) )

Misled by CPC ads, some women call crisis pregnancy centers to inquire about available reproductive-health services and prices. When presented with such inquiries, the staff at CPCs often evade the question or lie outright in order to convince woman to come to their center. CPC advocates have been very explicit that the goal of these phone conversations is not to answer questions but rather to lure women into their centers.

• The Option Line Handbook stresses to volunteers that "while [they] are on the phone, [their] objective is to schedule an appointment" so that women will come to the center. While the guidelines advise volunteers to give clients only factual information, the handbook also pressures them to keep the client interested and provide responses, whether or not the volunteer is qualified to do so, by reminding them that "callers are looking for fast answers and may turn elsewhere if they do not get them."(15)
• At a CPC conference, the trainer advised attendees, mostly CPC operators, to tell callers asking about abortion care that, although the center does not offer abortion services, it does provide free ultrasounds that the woman will need to have before she can get abortion care.(16)
• Worse, CPCs have a new strategy to bolster this telephone sales pitch. More and more states are passing laws forcing women to submit to an ultrasound before getting abortion care, (17) and national umbrella organizations openly state that an ancillary purpose of these proposals is to give CPCs a new tool of persuasion—they allow staff on the phone to tell a woman truthfully that by law she will have to have an ultrasound. While they may insinuate that their facility will help her comply, in reality there are no guidelines to ensure a CPC’s ultrasound meets these laws’ requirements. CPCs even are free to refuse to release a print-out of the image for a woman to take to her provider, should she indicate that she is seriously considering abortion.
• In a documentary about crisis pregnancy centers called 12th & Delaware, a CPC director trains volunteers in the telephone script she uses to divert questions from potential clients and lure them into the center:

If you don’t hook her right away, she hangs up on you. When she calls and she says "Do you do abortions?" I say "Are you calling for yourself or are you calling for your friend?"...and we engage in conversation. Because if she calls and says "Do you do abortions?" and I say "No," click. [The CPC director pantomimes hanging up the phone]. I’m trying to get her in the door. Take control of the conversation...I don’t mind the criticisms of taking control. "That doesn’t sound fair." Well too bad!(18)

Once women are enticed into crisis pregnancy centers, they may be subjected to a variety of coercive and offensive tactics intended to prevent them from exercising their right to choose.

• Women may be forced to watch shocking films, slide shows, or pictures, designed to scare vulnerable women into carrying pregnancies to term.
  • One volunteer at a CPC states that to shake the complacency of women seeking abortion care, she pulls out a big, color photo of a fetus with closed eyes and a smile. She then flips to another full-page color picture: fetuses in a trash bin. Sometimes she takes [the pregnant women] into a tiny chapel to pray before a marble altar.(21)
  • An Arizona man whose 16-year-old daughter had been raped took her to a CPC, not realizing that it was an anti-choice fake clinic. After being shown "brutal footage" including pictures of dismembered fetuses, the man claimed that, "they just emotionally raped her...They are advocates for the unborn, and to hell with the troubled person. They had an ax to grind, and just terrorized her."(22)
  • In Milwaukee, a woman went to a "pregnancy help center" to talk about her options. Instead, she was told that she "had the devil inside her" and was then "bombarded with graphic images of disfigured babies and aborted fetuses."(23)
• In an effort to scare women away from considering abortion care, some CPCs provide false propaganda about the "consequences" of abortion—including false claims that abortion causes breast cancer, sterility, and psychological damage.(24)
  • In a New York Times op-ed, one woman described of her experience at a CPC in Cedar Rapids, Iowa: "the 'counseling' that I received included the following: I was cautioned that abortions caused breast cancer...I was warned that I would inevitably suffer from post-abortion stress syndrome.... I was told that I would not hear this information from doctors, because doctors make money performing abortions and would lie about the procedure’s risks." (25)

To Read More About CPCs Click Here To Download Original Article From ProChoiceAmerica.org

1 Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association (AMA), Informed Consent, Ethical Opinion E-8.08, CODE OF MEDICAL ETHICS, at http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician- resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion808.shtml (last visited Oct. 1, 2015).

2 Ohio Right to Life, Life Talk: From Overturning Roe to Ending Abortion Permanently (2012),at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-WX_YS2YF8 (last visited Oct. 1, 2015).

3 United States House of Representatives Committee On Government Reform, False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers (2006), at http://www.chsourcebook.com/articles/waxman2.pdf (last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

4 12TH & DELAWARE (Home Box Office 2010).

5 Planned Parenthood of America, Inc. (PPFA), Anti-Abortion Counseling Centers: A Consumer’s Alert to

Deception, Harassment, and Medical Malpractice (2002).

6 Family Research Council, A Passion to Serve, A Vision for Life: Pregnancy Resource Center Service Report 2009, Family Research Council (2009).

7 National Institute of Family and Life Advocates at http://www.nifla.org/; Care Net, Care Net Affiliation at

http://www.care-net.org/care-net-pregnancy-center-affiliation; Heartbeat International, Worldwide

Directory of Pregnancy Help, search “United States” at http://www.heartbeatinternational.org/worldwide-directory

(last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

8 Thomas Glessner, Editorial, Ultrasound: Double Bonus for Life, Knowledge, FREE LANCE-STAR, March 22, 2012 at A7.

9 Planned Parenthood of America, Inc. (PPFA), Anti-Abortion Counseling Centers: A Consumer’s Alert to Deception, Harassment, and Medical Malpractice (2002); Press Release, NARAL Pro-Choice America, 66,608 Americans Call on Yellowpages.com and Superpages.com to Stop Allowing Deceptive Anti-Abortion Ads, (July 6, 2010) at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/media/press-releases/2010/pr07062010_cpc-sp-yp.html (last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

10 Heartbeat International, Option Line at http://www.heartbeatinternational.org/our-work/option-line (last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

11 For example, a sidebar advertisement on Encyclopedia.com with the heading “Las Vegas Abortion” led

to the homepage for First Choice Pregnancy Services, an organization that, in its FAQs tells women that

“you can avoid the pain and cost of a surgical abortion. First Choice Pregnancy Services is not here to sell you a surgical abortion. So come in today to see if you are a candidate for natural pregnancy termination.” See First Choice Pregnancy Services, Abortion, at http://firstchoicelv.org/pregnant/questions/abortion.php (last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

12 Heartbeat International, Option Line serves PHCs at http://www.heartbeatinternational.org/item/141- option-line-serves-phcs (emphasis added) (last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

13 NARAL Pro-Choice America, Get Involved/Issue Campaigns at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/get- involved/issue-campaigns/google-cpc.html (last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

14 Pres Release, NARAL Pro-Choice America, In Response to NARAL Pro-Choice America, Google Removes Deceptive Anti-Choice Ads from Search Engine (April 28, 2014) at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/media/press-releases/2014/pr04282014_google_cpc.html (last visited Dec. 9, 2015).

15 Heartbeat International and Care Net, Option Line Handbook, 2007.

16 Cosmopolitan, "Save the Mother, Save the Baby": An Inside Look at a Pregnancy Center Conference, April 6, 2015, at http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a38642/heartbeat-international-conference-crisis- pregnancy-centers-abortion/ (emphasis added) (last visited Oct. 2, 2015).

17 For more information about forced-ultrasound laws, see NARAL Pro-Choice America’s fact sheet,

Forced-Ultrasound Legislation is an Egregious Intrusion into Medical Care.

18 12TH & DELAWARE (Home Box Office 2010).

19 Rachel E. Stassen-Berger, More Than a Street Divides Clinic, Center, ST. PAUL PIONEER PRESS, Apr. 10, 2005.

20 12TH & DELAWARE (Home Box Office 2010).

21 Alan Cooperman, Abortion Battle: Prenatal Care or Pressure Tactics?, WASH. POST, February 21, 2002, at A01.

22. Martin Van Der Werf, Some Abortion Centers Bogus Counseling is ‘One-Sided,’ Panel Told, ARIZ. REPUBLIC, Sept. 21, 1991, at A1.

23 Center for Reproductive Rights, Crisis Pregnancy Centers Seek Public Funds and Legitimacy, 11 REPROD. FREEDOM NEWS, July/Aug. 2002, at 3.

24 Center for Reproductive Rights, Crisis Pregnancy Centers Seek Public Funds and Legitimacy, 11 REPROD. FREEDOM NEWS, July/Aug. 2002, at 4.

25 Katie Stack, When I Needed Help, I Got Propaganda, NEW YORK TIMES, Oct. 5, 2011.

26 United States House of Representatives Committee On Government Reform, False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers (2006), at http://www.chsourcebook.com/articles/waxman2.pdf (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

27 NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, Unmasking Fake Clinics, The Truth About Crisis Pregnancy Centers in California (2010) at http://www.prochoicecalifornia.org/assets/bin/pdfs/cpcreport2010- revisednov2010.pdf (last visited Dec. 8, 2015); NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland Fund; Maryland Crisis Pregnancy Center Investigations: The Truth Revealed (2008), at http://www.prochoicemd.org/assets/bin/pdfs/cpcreportfinal.pdf (last visited Dec. 8, 2015); NARAL Pro- Choice Massachusetts and NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts Foundation, Just Because You're Pregnant...Lies, Half Truths, and Manipulation at Crisis Pregnancy Centers in Massachusetts (2011) at http://www.prochoicemass.org/assets/bin/NARAL%20PCM%20CPC%20Report%202011.pdf (last visited Dec. 8, 2015); NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota Foundation; State-Funded Deception: Minnesota’s Crisis Pregnancy Centers (2012) at http://www.prochoiceminnesota.org/assets/bin/2012NARAL_MNCPCReport_.pdf (last visited Oct. 1, 2015); NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri Foundation; Show Me Truth: an Investigation into Crisis Pregnancy Centers in St. Louis and Mid-Missouri (2012) (on file); NARAL Pro-Choice New York Foundation and National Institute for Reproductive Health, She Said Abortion Could Cause Breast Cancer (2010) at http://www.prochoiceny.org/assets/bin/pdfs/cpcreport2010.pdf (last visited Dec. 8, 2015); NARAL Pro- Choice North Carolina Foundation; The Truth Revealed: North Carolina’s Crisis Pregnancy Centers (2011) at http://www.prochoicenc.org/assets/bin/pdfs/2011NARAL_CPCReport_V05_web.pdf (last visited Dec. 8,

2015); NARAL Pro-Choice Texas Foundation, The Texas ‘Alternatives to Abortion’ Program: Bad Health Policy, Bad Fiscal Policy (2011), at http://www.scribd.com/doc/249671713/The-Texas-Alternatives-to-Abortion- Program-Bad-Health-Policy-Bad-Fiscal-Policy (last visited Dec. 8, 2015); NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia; Crisis Pregnancy Centers Revealed, Part II: An Investigative Update on Virginia Crisis Pregnancy Centers (2013) at http://www.naralva.org/what-is-choice/cpc/revealed.shtml (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

28 Rosen, The Public Health Risks of Crisis Pregnancy Centers, 2012, PERSP. ON SEXUAL AND REPRO. HEALTH, Sept. 2010, 40(3):201–4.

29 First Choice Pregnancy Services, Abortion, at http://firstchoicelv.org/pregnant/questions/abortion.php; (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

30 Early Pregnancy Loss: Frequently Asked Questions, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, available at http://www.acog.org/~/media/For%20Patients/faq090.pdf (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

31 First Choice Pregnancy Services, Abortion, at http://firstchoicelv.org/pregnant/questions/abortion.php; (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

32 Rosen, The Public Health Risks of Crisis Pregnancy Centers, 2012, PERSP. ON SEXUAL AND REPRO. HEALTH, Sept. 2010, 40(3):201–4.

33 12TH & DELAWARE (Home Box Office 2010).

34 Of women less than 13 weeks pregnant who obtain surgical abortions, 97 percent report no complications; 2.5% have minor complications that can be handled at the medical office or abortion facility; and less than .5 percent have more serious complications that require some additional surgical procedure and/or hospitalization. National Abortion Federation, Safety of Abortion, (2006), at http://prochoice.org/education-and-advocacy/about-abortion/abortion-facts/ (last visited Oct. 1, 2015). 35 12TH & DELAWARE (Home Box Office 2010).

36 12TH & DELAWARE (Home Box Office 2010).

37 Care Net, About Care Net, at http://www.care-net.org/about (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

38 Care Net, Care Net Initiatives(on file) .

39 Care Net, Care Net Initiatives (on file). “While there are many areas lacking pregnancy centers, we are first seeking to serve the community with the highest abortion rate – African Americans. The successes and lessons learned in engaging the African American community (albeit a different culture) will be beneficial as we expand our efforts to reach another underserved community—Hispanic women.”

40 Heartbeat of Miami, About Us (on file).

41 Taking it to the streets of St. Louis (2011) at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a76XErVpCP8&lr=1&feature=mhsn (last visited Dec. 8, 2015). 42 Shaking the Stronghold of Abortion in Urban Pittsburgh (2011) at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u91pXXlzn2c (emphasis added) (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

43 Vitae Foundation Promotional Video (2008), at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nD4AbuXz6g (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

44 National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, Policy Brief: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Teen Pregnancy (June 2010) at https://thenationalcampaign.org/sites/default/files/resource-primary- download/Briefly_PolicyBrief_RacialEthnicDisparities.pdf (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

45 Kauthar B. Umar, M.A., Maternal Mortality, African Americans Remain at Higher Risk, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Closing the Gap, Maternal Health, February 2004.

46 NARAL Pro-Choice America & NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, Who Decides? The Status of

Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States (26th ed. 2017), at www.WhoDecides.org.

47 H.R.636, 111th Cong., (2009)

48 H.R. 1388, 111th Cong., (2009)

49 H.R.165, 112th Cong., (2011); H.R.195, 111th Cong., (2009).

50 NARAL Pro-Choice America & NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, Who Decides? The Status of

Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States (26th ed. 2017), at www.WhoDecides.org.

51 South Dakota H.B. 1217, 2011 Leg. Reg. Sess. (S.D. 2011).

52 Planned Parenthood of MN, ND, SD v. Dauggard Choice Inc. of Texas v. Graham, (preliminary injunction issued).

53 NARAL Pro-Choice America & NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, Who Decides? The Status of

Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States (26th ed. 2017), at www.WhoDecides.org.

54 NARAL Pro-Choice America & NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, Who Decides? The Status of

Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States (26th ed. 2017), at www.WhoDecides.org,

at www.WhoDecides.org.

55 H.R.3378, 114th Cong., (2015).

56 Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, et. al., No. 10- 760-MJG (N.D. MD, October 21, 2016).

57 Austin Life Care, Inc. v. City of Austin, 1:11-00875-LY (2014).

58 Centro Tepeyac v. Montgomery County, 8:10-cv-01259, 11-1336 (2014)

59 San Francisco Admin. Code Sec. 93.1-93.5

60 Press Release, Office of San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, Cohen, Herrera, Take on S.F. ‘Crisis Pregnancy Centers’ for Deceptive Marketing Practices (August 2, 2011), at http://www.sfcityattorney.org/2011/08/02/cohen-herrera-take-on-s-f-crisis-pregnancy-centers-for- deceptive-marketing-tactics/ (last visited Dec. 8, 2015).

61 First Resort, Inc. v. Herrera et al, 4:11-cv-05534 (N.D.C. 2014)

62 Local Law 17, N.Y.C. Admin. Code

63 Pregnancy Care Center of New York v. City of New York and Evergreen Association, Inc. v. City of New York, 13-1504 and 13-1462 (2014) cert. denied.

64 Ch 30, Dane Co. Code of Ordinances (May 24, 2013).

65 A.B.775, 2015 Leg., (Cal. 2015).

66 National Institute of Family and Life Advocates; Pregnancy Care Center and Fallbrook Pregnancy Resource Center v. Kamala Harris, No. ‘15CV2277 JAH DHB (S.D. Cal. 2015); A Woman’s Friend Pregnancy Resource Center, Crisis Pregnancy Center of Northern California v. Kamala Harris, No. 2:15-cv-02122 (S.D. Cal. 2015).

67 A Woman's Friend Pregnancy Resource Clinic v. Harris, 153 F.Supp.3d 1168 (E.D.Cal., 2015); National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris, No. 16-55249 (C.A.9 Cal. 2016); Mountain Right to Life v. California Attorney Gen. Kamala Harris, No. CV1600119TJHSPX (C.D. Cal. July 8, 2016).

68 A Woman’s Friend Pregnancy Resource Center, Crisis Pregnancy Center of Northern California v. Kamala Harris, No. 15-17517 (9th Cir. 2016).

69 See Press Release, Office of Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker, Oakland adopts ordinance banning false advertising by anti-choice “crisis pregnancy centers” (July 20, 2016), at http://www.oaklandcityattorney.org/News/Press%20releases/CPC%20ord%20II.html.

Complete Source Article Can Can Be Downloaded Here