Friday, February 3, 2012 / 8:24 pm

Erecting Hurdles in the Komen Race for the Cure

VP Karen Handel lets ideology trump science.

by Jim Washburn

Karen Handel
Karen Handel

So the Susan G. Komen Foundation has provisionally reversed is decision to defund Planned Parenthood, after donors and decent people everywhere were outraged by that decision. Komen’s directors may have been forced to adopt a change in strategy, but don’t expect that they’ve also had a change of heart.

They’ve tried to explain that there was nothing political or pro-life in the new guidelines they adopted that denied funding to any group under investigation, and there certainly is an argument to be made for wanting everything to appear squeaky-clean and above board when you’re asking donors to entrust you with kaboodles of money.

But Jeffrey Goldberg has reported in The Atlantic that three separate inside sources have told him that Komen Senior VP Karen Handel had pushed the new guidelines and that they were tailored specifically to allow Komen to give Planed Parenthood the heave-ho; crafted to work in concert with conservative whack-job congressman Cliff Stearns' investigation of Planned Parenthood. Stearns says he suspects they are using federal funds to provide abortions (which is against the law, thanks to previous conservative whack-jobs), even though every previous investigation has proved unfounded.

The Komen foundation has amended its guidelines to now only cut off funding in the case of conclusive criminal investigations, not political ones, which is how the guideline should have been written by any sensible and even slightly lawyered-up organization.

So, OK, everything’s hunky dory now, or should be, except focus on the dispute has brought to light information that suggests VP Handel may be of a mindset that could change the organization’s Race for the Cure, which she heads, into a steeplechase, erecting ideological hurdles between women and the science and practice of breast cancer health.

Handel is a conservative Republican, a former Georgia secretary of state and 2010 candidate for governor, when one of her touted aims was to defund Planned Parenthood at the state level. In her blog at the time, she wrote, “since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood.”

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs, but when you are dealing with, for example, CANCER, you don’t want someone deciding policy who puts their beliefs ahead of science or the sound practice of medicine. Planned Parenthood has been an effective partner of Komen for years, and has delivered quality, compassionate, cost-effective care—including all-important breast exams–to American women for the better part of a century.

There are other instances of Handel taking positions or pursuing courses of action that diverged from science or reason. As GA Secretary of State, two of her signal achievements were getting a law passed to make it harder for people to vote, and  investigating voter fraud, despite such fraud having been found to be nearly non-existent, and instead an excuse the George W. Bush administration was pushing to disenfranchise poor and presumably Democratic-leaning voters.

Then there’s Handel’s stand on gay adoption, related in an interview unearthed today by blogger John Aravosis.

Some highlights:

Handel: As a Christian, marriage is between a man and a woman. I do not think that gay relationships are—they are not what God intended. And that’s just my viewpoint on it… I am against gay adoption.
Interviewer: Would you favor outlawing gay adoptions?
Handel: Yeah, I would consider that, absolutely.
Interviewer: Do you know any gay couples with children?
Handel: Not that I’m aware of.
Interviewer: I want to know why you think gay parents aren’t as legitimate as heterosexual parents.
Handel: Because I don’t.

The American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and others would disagree with her on that, which rather begs the question:

Do you want someone deciding policy in a science-based organization who can choose to ignore science on a whim, who won't believe facts simply “because I don’t”? 

Jim Washburn has written for the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register, the OC Weekly, various MSN sites and just about anybody else willing to trade a paycheck for a pulse.
jim@fourstory.org

Comments

I am soooo tired of women in expensive, black fitted suits, a sensible haircut,  with that ever present single strand of pearls, smiling to the camera and professing what they think we want to hear, yet the minute the doors are closed and the “emergency session” is in progress, they just turn around and f2*k their constituents… ahem, I am not listening to you any more ladies. Done. Over. Finito.

As far as I am concerned, let the second American Revolution Begin.

2012-02-4 by philip o'connor

Whoa whoever. That’s exactly the crap I get from the conservative press: tell me first what the women are wearing and then what’s on their minds if anything.
Get this then: I am so sick of men with sprayed hair and pink ties telling me what to do with my reproductive system and never mind that the other side would way in on what women can do with passages leading to said reproductive system.
Solution: What doesn’t everyone just shut up and let women decide what to do with either or both.
Oh, and did I forget the men wearing weird costumes like black dresses buttoned all the way down with white collars and their superiors wearing pointy hats and embroidered shawls? And those with fur trimmed hats and straggly beards and, and those with funny little hats and straggly beards who make their women wear sacks over their heads and strangle them if they bear too many girls.
The world sucks. It’s too late for any sort of revolution except the one that should take place periodically in one’s own head.

2012-02-6 by daniella walsh

Enter a Comment

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Archives

Features | Blog