Melinda Delahoyde has served in various capacities for several pro-life organizations, including Americans United for Life and Care Net.  She is the current chairman of the board of Care Net.  Kristin Hansen is the vice president of Communications and Center Innovations of   Care Net.

Abortion.  The word is part of the vocabulary of almost every American over the age of twelve.  Abortion has been embedded in the American experience since January 22, 1973.  On that day, the U.S. Supreme Court, with rulings on Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, struck down every state law governing abortion and replaced those laws with a ruling that granted the right to privacy for every woman, a right to privacy that included the right to have an abortion during her entire pregnancy.  Legalized abortion on demand had come to America.

The restriction on the liberty appeared to be illusory...She must find a licensed clinic after month three; and after her child was viable, she must find an abortionist who believed she needed an abortion.  When the full dimensions of the liberty were realized, the liberty was little short of unlimited.[1]

The battle lines drawn over the right to life of the unborn remain as sharp and divisive as they did on that January 1973 day.  Abortion continues to be an explosive front in the culture wars, as the recent Senate confirmation hearings for Judges John Roberts and Samuel Alito attest.

Yet, as the judicial, legislative, and public education battles rage, there is another movement at work to end abortion in America.  It is the mostly unpublicized, often unnoticed work of the pregnancy center movement.  Begun over thirty years ago, this grassroots effort, enlisting thousands of volunteers and funded almost entirely by local community contributions, encompasses over 2,000 local centers nationwide.  While judicial and legislative efforts may take years to come to fruition, the pregnancy center movement works to "help stop abortion every day."  While the ever-changing tide of American politics can bring a pro-life or pro-abortion President into office, and a higher court can quickly overturn a legal decision limiting abortion rights, the pregnancy center movement has experienced slow but steady expansion and increased effectiveness at reaching abortion-vulnerable women, one life at a time in the thirty-plus years since the Roe and Doe decisions.  A closer look at the history, expansion, and transformation of the movement will reveal why it is one of the most vivid, undiluted, and practical applications of religion in contemporary American society.

An understanding of the basics of abortion in America is helpful in understanding the emergence of pregnancy centers on the American scene.  The Supreme Court's decision, in one day, transformed the national landscape concerning abortion.  Until that day, states had been relatively free to legislate their own restrictions concerning the procedure.  Some states, such as New York, had liberalized abortion laws, while others, such as Utah, held tight restrictions against the procedure.[2]

On that day abortion had "gone public."  The Roe decision was the first in a succession of cases that strengthened and expanded a woman's right to an abortion.  That "Woeful Roe Ruling," as George Will has recently described it, has transformed the right to privacy from "preserving personal seclusion and keeping personal information secret.  It now means personal autonomy — everyone's right to do whatever he or she pleases as long as others are not harmed."[3]  Court cases denying parental approval or spousal notification expanded the newly discovered right to abortion and complemented the radical feminist belief that abortion was not just a necessary evil, it was a positive good, and essential to obtaining and maintaining unfettered personal autonomy for women in all decisions concerning their own bodies.

Three decades later, the statistics illustrate the grim legacy of legalized abortion in the United States.  Since l973, over 40 million abortions have been performed.  Every day in America, more than 3,500 abortions are performed.  At current rates, about one in three American women will have had an abortion by the time she reaches age 45.[4] 

The sweeping scope of the high Court's decisions brought the abortion issue to the forefront of public consciousness.  Abortion clinics sprung up in communities, particularly in the urban centers of major cities.  The option of legalized abortion was now available to every woman facing a pregnancy.  The language used by abortion advocates often made that decision appear simple and emotionally uncomplicated.  Terms like the "products of conception" took away from the fact that this was a biological human life that was being destroyed and focused the decision on the right of the woman to choose the best option for her personal circumstances.  Attorneys, ethicists, and legislators began developing strategies for reinforcing or dismantling the Roe decision.

Yet, that was not enough for those who believed that abortion was not the answer to solve society's social ills.  For those who believed that all human life was created in the image of God, a major question remained.  What about the woman facing abortion?  How do we provide information, options, and hope to the woman who thinks abortion is her only choice?  Yes, abortion is morally wrong, but speaking only that truth about abortion is not enough.  We must speak the truth in love and compassion for the woman who thinks she has no other option.

It was this train of thought, beginning with the belief that all human life was God-created and sacred, and ending with the conviction that something must be done for the woman facing an unplanned pregnancy, that laid the foundation for the pregnancy center movement.  That question of the woman was on the minds of thousands of Americans during the decade following the l973 abortion court decisions. 

The example of the Christian Action Council (CAC) is illustrative of the genesis of this grassroots movement.  The CAC was founded in 1975 by evangelicals Dr. Harold O.J. Brown, his wife Grace, and Dr. C. Everett Koop, with the support of theologian Francis Schaeffer.  The CAC was founded as an evangelical public education organization to equip and mobilize Protestant Evangelicals in the battle to end abortion.  In the 1980's, CAC launched initiatives such as Sanctity of Human Life Sunday to educate churches about the abortion issue.  The CAC staff, located in Washington, D.C., focused their efforts on grassroots organization, congressional lobbying, and providing educational resources.  Yet, the question of the woman facing abortion and the importance of providing alternatives to abortion, along with a presentation of the gospel message of love and forgiveness, was not forgotten.  The idea of "crisis pregnancy centers" that would provide information and options, as well as share the message of grace and forgiveness of the Biblical God, emerged in the organization.  Grassroots organization of Evangelicals now included how to develop and implement a plan for such a center in local communities.  CAC opened its first pregnancy center in 1980.

The demand for information and resources to start pregnancy centers steadily increased during the 1980's, at the same time that other evangelical organizations such as Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, and Concerned Women for America emerged on the public education front.  The board of directors of CAC soon realized that their mission had transformed from one of education and grassroots activism to promoting and assisting the pro-life evangelical work of their over 300 affiliated pregnancy centers.  The organization was renamed Care Net.  Its mission was now to be "a Christian ministry assisting and promoting the evangelistic, pro-life work of pregnancy centers in North America."  Today Care Net supports over 920 centers across the country.

The transformation of the Christian Action Council, i.e. Care Net, illustrates the growth of a grassroots response of care and compassion to legalized abortion and the emergence of an evangelical presence in the "service" component of the pro-life movement.  Evangelicals were not, however, the first to develop a grassroots network of care for women.  Years before the Roe abortion decision, Catholics had responded to the liberalization of state abortion laws by forming alternative to abortion organizations.  Catholic theology and teaching was clear on the sanctity and value of all human life.  The institutional nature of these teachings and the strong pro-children tradition of the Catholic Church enabled them to respond more quickly to the assault on the value of human life that liberalized state abortion laws represented.  Birthright was founded in Canada and soon was incorporated in the United States.  Alternatives to Abortion International was formed in 1971 as a federation of independent organizations that could coordinate their efforts on behalf of the unborn and women.[5]  Protestants, particularly Evangelicals, were united around key theological tenets, but more diverse in organization and cultural perspectives.  Although many evangelicals would quickly understand the issues and implications of the high Court's abortion decisions, the mobilization of an evangelical response to abortion would be slower in developing.

The Catholic organizations, for the most part, were distinct from the evangelical centers in one key aspect.  Evangelism was not at the heart of their mission.  As Peggy Hartshorn, founder of Heartbeat, has noted,

Catholics...were in the forefront of a movement to start alternatives to abortion services, although they rarely saw this as a Catholic issue, or even a uniquely Christian mission.  It was simply part of who they were.  The work...was...a humanitarian effort, although the motive was from deeply held religious values and beliefs.[6]

Catholics were wary of having the pro-life response to abortion labeled as simply a Catholic issue and barred from the arena of non-religious (and therefore, public) discourse.  Even though Catholic pregnancy centers varied in aspects of their mission and organizational structure from their evangelical counterparts, their efforts, combined with those of evangelicals, would serve millions of women in the years to follow.

The sudden legalization of abortion-on-demand, the presence of millions of women who would consider abortion, and the emergence of abortion clinics in American communities were important factors in the rise of the pregnancy center movement.  The understanding that there were two victims of abortion and that the grace and compassion of a loving God must be extended to the woman who was facing abortion were also key reasons for the emergence of hundreds of pregnancy centers.  But those were not the only factors that account for the growth and "staying power" of these centers.

One must ask why the abortion issue continues to be one of the most bitter and divisive issues of our age.  Why was the issue not considered settled when the Court rendered its decisions in 1973?  Why does the abortion controversy not just fade away?  Certainly the language used by the advocates of legalized abortion was intended to dissolve any public outcry over the death of millions of unborn lives.  Abortion was a private choice, an extension of the constitutionally protected right to privacy.  Surely every American has the right to make personal decisions governing their own life and body.  Abortion, however, will never be simply an individual choice, regardless of any court decision. 

Abortion remains at the heart of the culture wars in America because it pits two absolutely opposed world and life views against each other.  Abortion forces us to confront our most deeply held beliefs about God, man, and the definition of what it means to be a human being, protected by the laws of the land.  The heart of the abortion issue is the struggle between what is often referred to as the sanctity of life worldview and the quality of life worldview.  At the core of the sanctity of life view is the belief that all human life — unborn, handicapped, or elderly — is sacred because it is created in the image of God.  Dr. Paul Ramsey states it clearly.

The notion that an individual human life is absolutely unique, inviolable, irreplaceable, non-interchangeable, not substitutable, and not meldable with other lives is a notion that exists in our civilization because it is Christian, and that idea is so fundamental in the edifice of Western law and morals that it cannot be removed without bringing the whole house down.[7]

Abortion is morally wrong because it tears the fabric of the absolute sanctity of all human life, separating unborn human life from the human community of those who are viewed as fully human and deserving of the law's protection.  The Supreme Court's abortion decisions in 1973 affirmed this quality of life view that draws a line of separation between biological human life and legally protected human beings.  Justice Blackmun, speaking for the majority in the Roe decision, described unborn human life as "less than persons in the whole sense."[8]  As John Noonan commented, "Biological evidence that they were human he ignored... The law created persons and any human conduct might be given valid legal form."[9]

Yet, if one can possess all the biological characteristics of human life and be denied admission into the community of human beings who are legally protected because one does not possess certain qualities of life, where will we draw the line?  If we are free to take the life of an unborn child ten days before birth, why cannot we take that same life ten days after birth?  The reasons for taking the life remain the same.  The life does not possess the correct calculus of qualities that recommends its inclusion in the family of human beings.

Those who oppose abortion understand the underlying philosophical principles behind abortion in America and the logical consequences of accepting such a view of life.  That is why, after three decades, the battle over abortion rights rages as fiercely as ever.  Is it any wonder that with these fundamental views about human life at stake that U.S. Supreme Court nominees are grilled mercilessly (and rudely) by senators, spouses are reduced to tears, and congressional aides are sent scurrying off to look for memos, decades old, that might contain even one phrase that would imply the nominee would limit, in any way, the sacred right to an abortion that some view as permanently enshrined in the Constitution?

It is against this background of a war of worldviews that the pregnancy center movement has emerged and flourished.  As the abortion issue continues to take center stage in American life, the need to speak the truth in love to women about abortion becomes greater, especially to this second generation of women who have grown up with legalized abortion in our country.  There is an understanding among those who uphold the sanctity of life worldview that it, indeed, will "bring the whole house down" if we abandon the unborn child and the woman to abortion on demand.  The tenacity and determination of individuals that has brought about the emergence and growth of hundreds of pregnancy centers is rooted in the belief that our most basic values about God and man are under attack and must be affirmed. 

Now, decades later, over 2,300 pregnancy centers span the United States.  Their growth has been fueled by the sweeping scope of the 1973 abortion decisions, the explosive entrance of legalized abortion in America, and a clear understanding of all that is at stake for a society if it abandons the protection of human life.  A faith-based desire to minister the love and grace of God to both victims of abortion, the woman and the unborn child, has led to a commitment to save one life at a time that has blossomed into ministries that serve thousands of women each year.

Yet, it is the ability of the pregnancy centers to transform over three decades to meet the needs of a changing culture that is the strongest testimony to their longevity, growth, and effectiveness.  Their innovative approaches to serving women in the areas of intervention, prevention, and reconciliation are reaching the minds and hearts of a new generation of abortion-vulnerable women.  While there are several national organizations that support the work of pregnancy centers, the following primarily focuses on highlights from Care Net and its network of affiliates. 

Intervention Measuring Success  

The primary work of pregnancy centers is intervention — meeting a woman at a point of decision and crisis and equipping her with information and support to make a positive, life-affirming choice.  After thirty years of offering these services, movement leaders are now taking a step back to seriously assess their impact.  With still more than one million abortions in the U.S. every year, they realize there is still much work to do.

The first step to measuring effectiveness is having solid statistics.  In 2003, Care Net launched the Center of Tomorrow Project to begin to build a storehouse of research, or "think tank," to support the work of pregnancy centers.  One of the initiatives of the project was to gather and report reliable national statistics from the organization's affiliates.  In 2004, Care Net published its first annual statistical report which measured the impact of its then 750 affiliate centers in the U.S. and Canada.  This report found that each year more than 110,000 women who visit Care Net pregnancy centers are pregnant, and 90 percent of these women choose to carry their pregnancy to term.  These are encouraging statistics; however, a majority of the women who are currently visiting pregnancy centers are likely to carry their babies to term, but need resources and emotional support that may not be found elsewhere in the community.  While this is a valuable service, pregnancy centers want the majority of women who visit their centers to be those who are actually considering, or at risk of, having an abortion.  Analysis of annual statistics helps Care Net know what is needed to help pregnancy centers better reach the population most at risk.  It also provides fodder for Care Net's quarterly journal, Center of Tomorrow, which was launched in 2004 to provide current research on emerging programs, services, and methods within the pregnancy center movement. 

The Impact of New Services  

The introduction of ultrasound machines in pregnancy centers began slowly decades ago as research began to show the effect these images have on a woman facing an unplanned pregnancy.  In 1983, the New England Journal of Medicine published an article by Drs. John Fletcher and Mark Evans who found that seeing the image of the baby "in the late first or early mid-trimester of pregnancy, before movement is felt by the mother, may also influence the resolution of any ambivalence toward the pregnancy itself in favor of the fetus. Ultrasound examination may thus result in fewer abortions and more desired pregnancies."[10]

The ultrasound image was a welcomed alternative for pregnancy centers.  Showing images of life, the mother's own child, as opposed to a life destroyed, would prove to be a gentler, yet even more compelling approach to educating the client, especially the clients raised in today's more visually oriented society:

This is not a generation that has grown up on the written word. Far from it: they grew up on visual images. They are the product, in perhaps its purest form, of television, where for a generation producers have picked compelling visuals and then assigned writers to match words to the video. It is a generation that scans information quickly; information that can be graphic or text, and one that is more than adept at picking quick meaning out of pictures. It grew up 'reading' visual images rather than text.[11]

In 2004, Care Net unveiled its first look at the impact of ultrasound on a woman's pregnancy decision.  According to Care Net's annual statistics report on 2003 pregnancy center activity, 22 percent (118 centers) offered ultrasound services.  Among those women who were strongly considering abortion or who were at risk, 82 percent chose to carry their pregnancy to term after viewing an ultrasound.  In its 2004 report, Care Net showed 29 percent, or 250 centers, that offered ultrasound services.  That year, among those women who were strongly considering abortion or who were at risk, 75 percent decided to carry to term after viewing an ultrasound.[12]  Without an ultrasound, the same group of abortion-vulnerable women would choose life 64 percent of the time with traditional peer counseling that is offered at most centers.

Because of the significant opportunity to save lives through the use of ultrasound, Focus on the Family launched the Option Ultrasound program in 2003 which has the goal of helping to equip an additional 650 pregnancy centers with an ultrasound machine (or other necessary training or materials) by the year 2010.  The organization's strong commitment to investing considerable finances behind the project is critical.  Within a coarsening culture, there may be only a window of time before the influence of ultrasound on a mother considering abortion may lessen.

The Right Services in the Right Places  

In 2005, a number of news stories focused on the fact that the number of abortion clinics was dwindling and had become outnumbered by pregnancy centers.  This is true, but misleading.  It gives the public the sense that the abortion industry is being squashed by its competitor.  In reality, abortion clinics are fewer in number, but are more strategically located in urban communities and within reach of college campuses.  Therefore, if every currently located pregnancy center is outfitted with an ultrasound, there still may not be a significant dent in the abortion numbers.  Pregnancy centers, equipped with ultrasound and other necessary services, must be in the right places. 

Care Net and other pregnancy center organizations recognized this problem and, in the past, had been more reactive than proactive in addressing it.  However, in 2002, Care Net launched its Urban Initiative under the direction of Rev. Janine Simpson as director of Urban Center Development.  The project began with research in Philadelphia with regard to the demographics, availability of pregnancy centers vs. abortion clinics, and the potential of planting urban pregnancy centers.  What was discovered in Philadelphia was confirmed in a host of major cities across the nation. 

According to Planned Parenthood's Alan Guttmacher Institute, 94 percent of abortion providers are located in metropolitan areas and these providers outperform suburban locations; 99 percent of abortion providers that performed more than 400 abortions per year are in metropolitan areas. 

Other critical statistics involved those women having the majority of abortions.  The latest census report shows that 88 percent of African Americans and 91 percent of Hispanics live in metropolitan areas.  Together, African Americans and Hispanics comprise 25 percent of the population, but have 57 percent of abortions, according to Alan Guttmacher statistics.  African-American women are three times more likely to have an abortion than Caucasian women; Hispanic women are two and a half times more likely.  The research is clear: abortion providers are targeting minority women.

But why the disproportionate numbers?  Many trace the statistics back to the visionary behind the abortion movement: Planned Parenthood founder and eugenicist Margaret Sanger.  Sanger promoted birth control as a way to rid society of those "unfit" to have children in her 1922 book The Pivot of Civilization and as editor of Birth Control Review.  Her concept of "unfit" was initially the handicapped, but expanded over the years to include minorities.[13]  She sold the idea of birth control as a way to cure society of its many social ills: crime, unwed motherhood, and poverty.  Her organization sings the same tune today about the supposed societal benefits of abortion, while situating its facilities in minority neighborhoods and brushing its founder's racist views under the carpet.   

Care Net's Urban Initiative has made significant progress in what it has learned over the past three years.  It has established a number of models that various communities can adopt in order to connect urban women with pregnancy center services.  It has networked with hundreds of African-American pastors and worked in a host of cities where the discrepancy between abortion clinics and pregnancy centers are the worst.  Partnerships are arising between Christian ministries that already exist in urban communities and pregnancy centers.  Creative ideas and new services are being explored.  All of the major national pregnancy center organizations have now launched similar initiatives and are networking with one another. 

Another significantly underserved population is college students.  While the statistics on how many college students have abortions is unknown, it is known that 45 percent of women who have abortions are college-age and women aged 20-24 have a higher abortion rate than any other age group.[14]

Care Net formed a College Outreach Task Force in 2005 to begin to research what was necessary to better connect pregnancy center services to college and university students.  Many centers are moving forward to address the problem by locating within walking distance from campus, establishing registered student groups, or adding new services.  Additionally, a new federal bill has been introduced to provide $10 million for 200 grants to encourage institutions of higher education to establish and operate a "pregnant and parenting students" office.  If passed and implemented, it is hoped that the service arm of pregnancy centers that are already in place would work closely with such offices to serve students in need.

Situating pregnancy centers in more strategic places will not come without learning curves and challenges; however, it will eventually mean that abortion numbers will be reduced as the support services are connected with the areas of greatest need.  Therefore, these initiatives should be supported and pursued with commitment and vigor.

Open It and They Will Come?  

Being in the right place at the right time and offering needed services represent only half the battle.  Marketing your services to the targeted demographic is essential in order for clients to walk in the door.  Based on research provided by focus groups made up of women who had previously faced an unplanned pregnancy, the advertisements used by pregnancy centers include three key ingredients: that the services are free, that the services are confidential, and that the women may be feeling afraid. 

Over the years, Care Net has gained marketing expertise by conducting research, developing materials, and educating centers on how to implement local programs.  They launched a national ad campaign which allowed for outdoor advertising companies to donate free ad space on billboards and bus shelters.  Over the past ten years, more than 40,000 ads have been placed and more than $2 million has been donated each year.  Care Net's signature billboard features the words "Pregnant and Scared?" and a toll-free hotline number. 

In January 2003, Care Net and Heartbeat International launched a joint venture to open a 24-hour call center called the Option Line in Columbus, Ohio.  Staffed with trained phone consultants, the call center soon had the capability of handling thousands of calls per month.  The caller would be referred to the closest available pregnancy center that was either an affiliate of one of the two organizations or that met a certain set of standards set forth in what is called "Our Commitment of Care." 

But in the 21st century, simply having a phone number on an ad was not enough.  The website www.pregnancycenters.org was acquired, along with www.optionline.org, both directing to the same website.  On the site, Internet surfers could learn about the risks of abortion, as well as e-mail or send an "instant message" (IM) to a consultant at the Option Line. 

Whereas yellow page ads used to be the primary place where women found out about the Option Line, the statistics now show that more calls and e-mails (60 percent of the total contacts) come from women hearing about the call center on the Internet than any other form of advertising.  In 2004, Care Net and Heartbeat International launched a keyword ad campaign on Google and Yahoo search engines.  Advertisers bid on keywords such as "abortion," "free pregnancy tests," or "teen pregnancy" and create ads that will appear within the individual's search results.  The more that the advertiser is willing to pay for each word the more visible the ad is within the search results, and the amount charged is on a pay-per-click basis.  As the Option Line increased its investment in keyword advertising, the number of Internet contacts rose to more than 6,000 per month.  The most significant aspect of this advertising initiative is that seven out of ten women who contact the Option Line after seeing an Internet ad are women who are seriously considering abortion. 

The growth of the Option Line has been one of the most exciting developments in the pregnancy center movement over the last several years.  Today, the Option Line employs more than 40 trained phone consultants and is equipped with 12 phone stations and an Instant Messaging station.  The Option Line is also staffed and equipped to assist Spanish callers 24 hours a day.  The call center handles more than 15,000 calls and e-mails each month, and the Option Line website receives more than 50,000 visitors every month. 

Beyond Pregnancy Tests  

Committed to do whatever it takes to help women choose life, pregnancy centers are constantly looking for the most attractive services to offer.  If one were to travel throughout the country visiting a host of pregnancy centers, each one would be slightly different, yet consistent would be the entrepreneurial and creative spirit with which they serve their communities. 

At the Rockville Crisis Pregnancy Center in Rockville, Maryland, clients are offered the opportunity to take a "Computer Moms" class to acquire key job skills for employment.  At A Woman's Choice Resource Center in Louisville, Kentucky, an additional community center called "Necole's Place" is being opened to establish long-term relationships with women in order to effect significant life change in its clients.  And the Pregnancy Center of Pinellas Park (Florida) is opening a Christian birthing center to provide a significant incentive to its clients to choose life, as well as to be an outreach to its community at large. 

The addition of all sorts of services, particularly medical services, is costly for pregnancy centers.  However, all that is needed is to survey the services that are offered at a local Planned Parenthood clinic — everything from mammograms and cervical cancer screening to men's health programs and post-menopausal services — to understand that the competition for these women as clients is steep and no effort to reach them is too great. 

Prevention  

The work of pregnancy centers on behalf of women facing unplanned pregnancy is focused on treatment at the moment of crisis.  After years and years of this focus, it only makes sense that this type of work becomes frustrating.  It is not because those serving in pregnancy centers tire of their efforts, are overwhelmed, or lose compassion for the women in need, but rather that they desire to address root causes to prevent the crisis in the first place.  Establishing prevention programs was the natural progression for the pregnancy center movement. 

Abstinence Programs  

Many Americans have become well-acquainted with the existence of abstinence programs in schools and connect these programs to a very prominent advocate, President George W. Bush.  As a result of his administration, federal funding for abstinence programs has significantly increased, and the movement has grown in strength and size.  What many do not know is that this movement was birthed by pregnancy centers.  In fact, the movement's leader, Leslee Unruh, president of the Abstinence Clearinghouse, got her start by founding the Alpha Center, a pregnancy center in Sioux Falls in 1984.  Many of those recipients who have won federal grants for abstinence programs are pregnancy centers or programs that began at a pregnancy center.  In 2004, 64 percent (541 centers) of Care Net's affiliated pregnancy centers had an abstinence education program in their communities.  Seventy-one percent (600 centers) offered an abstinence counseling program at the center.  According to the work of The Heritage Foundation, a Washington D.C.-based think tank, there are at least ten evaluations that show that abstinence education programs are effective in delaying sexual activity among teenagers.  Additionally, these programs are strongly supported by a majority of parents, as well as positively received by students.  Yet, despite the tremendous expansion of the abstinence movement, the federal government still spends $12 dollars on contraception programs to every dollar on abstinence programs.  Nevertheless, as the success of abstinence programs continues to be recognized by communities, private funding for these programs will grow. 

Treating a New Epidemic  

Over the past 30 years, a silent epidemic has been brewing among America's teenagers: sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).  Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control are overwhelming.  Each year more than three million teens — 25 percent of teens having sex — will contract an STD.  In fact, two-thirds of all new cases will occur among teens and young adults aged 15-24.  According to The Medical Institute, adolescent females are at higher risk of contracting certain STDs than adult women, due to anatomical differences of the uterine cervix associated with age.[15]  Dr. Meg Meeker, in her book Epidemic: How Teen Sex Is Killing Our Kids, gives horrific and saddening accounts about what she sees in her practice: 

I and hundreds of doctors like me are on the front lines of this epidemic.  We see precancerous conditions in girls as young as 14, infertility in girls barely old enough to get pregnant, babies infected with STDs their mothers didn't know they had, and infants born with herpes-caused encephalitis infections, which cause massive brain swelling.  We see our children dying from HIV or cancer caused by HPV—dying before they've barely had a chance to live.[16]

Many pregnant women also suffer with STDs and, among other health consequences, are at risk of early onset of labor, premature rupture of the membranes surrounding the baby in the uterus, and uterine infections after delivery.  In addition, STDs can be passed from the pregnant woman to her baby before, during, or after the baby's birth.  The harmful effects of STDs in babies may include stillbirth, low birth weight, conjunctivitis, pneumonia, blood infection, neurologic damage, blindness, deafness, acute hepatitis, meningitis, chronic liver disease, and cirrhosis.[17]  According to CDC statistics, there are nearly 2 million pregnant women who have contracted an STD, and it is likely that many of these women are walking through the door of pregnancy centers.  In 2004, five percent of Care Net centers offered STD testing services, but that number is growing exponentially. 

By offering STD testing as a service, a pregnancy center is not only helping to stem the tide of the epidemic and providing another valuable service to its communities, but is also helping to prevent future abortions.  Those clients that visit the center for STD testing may not be pregnant at the time, but represent the very group of people who are at risk of an unplanned pregnancy in the future.  Thus, the opportunity presents itself during the client's visit to educate him or her about abortion and its effects and to cast another vision for them — a healthier and happier lifestyle of sexual integrity and marriage. 

Those pregnancy centers that are seeking to reach college students are finding that offering STD testing is crucial, partly because of the rise in the use of the "morning-after pill" or "emergency contraception" (EC).  According to a study published in 2002, 52 percent of college campus health centers distribute EC,[18] which can be taken up to three days after unprotected intercourse and can act as an abortifacient.  It is evident from the material distributed by college campus health clinics that students are not informed that the drug, which is eight times as powerful as a typical birth control pill, can act as an abortifacient or that the long-term effects of repeated use among adolescents are unknown.  It is promoted as "Plan B" for birth control, but in reality it is encouraging risky behavior and driving up STD rates, according to studies performed in countries that have allowed over-the-counter access to the drug.  The more students rely on EC to keep them "safe," the less of a draw a free pregnancy test is at a local pregnancy center and the more necessary is the testing and treatment of STDs. 

While the name of "pregnancy centers" may change to something like "A Woman's Choice Health Clinic," and all sorts of new services such as STD testing may be offered, the mission of these centers will always address the issue of abortion, just from different angles.

Reconciliation  

In addition to having an emphasis on crisis intervention and prevention, pregnancy centers have become a haven for spiritual healing after an abortion.  Many women suffer emotionally and spiritually with past abortions, but have no one safe to turn to for help.  Sadly, the last place they may go for support would be to a church.  Feeling alone, they may be experiencing grief, anxiety, guilt, depression, suicidal thoughts, relationship problems, eating disorders, alcohol and drug abuse, or other negative psychological reactions. 

A majority of pregnancy centers have established Post-Abortion Counseling and Education (PACE) programs which are Biblically centered and designed to help women understand and accept the forgiveness of Jesus Christ and be reconciled to God.  These programs are offered not only for women, but also for men who might have played a role in a past abortion decision.  In 2004, 76 percent of Care Net's centers offered a PACE program for women and 3,541 women participated; nineteen percent offered a PACE program for men and 168 men participated.  With more than 42 million abortions since 1973, there are still many walking wounded among us who need such care.  The good news is that the need for help is being raised by such groups as the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, which gives voice to those who have suffered, received healing, and testify to the pain of abortion.  Their testimony is a powerful warning to those young women who may be casually considering a future abortion. 

Conclusion  

Thus, pregnancy centers press ahead in a culture which in some aspects is increasingly becoming a "culture of life," where those who are political champions of abortion now say that it is a "tragedy" and should be "rare."  They press ahead in a culture where parents put 3-D fetal ultrasound pictures in picture frames and where it has become more fashionable (at least among Hollywood types) to be pregnant. 

Yet, they also exist in a culture that sympathizes with euthanasia and seems comfortable with employing a quality of life calculus.  They exist in a culture that creates multiple embryos in fertility clinics only to be stuck with "leftovers" which can be donated to science (for the sake of the diabetic young girl), destroyed, or adopted, and a culture that possesses earlier fetal testing for Down's Syndrome to leave early abortion options open.  And they exist in a society where human life seems increasingly degraded by morbid television shows like the latest called "Bones." 

It is likely that the good news/bad news scenario will persist; however, the good news is that people like those who lead the pregnancy center movement will continue to adapt, will persevere in searching for ways to connect with those at risk, and will continue to serve with integrity and compassion.  The example of growth and transformation of the pregnancy center movement over the past three decades is a vivid illustration of faith, creativity, and persistence woven together to serve some of the "least of these" in American society. 

IN ADDITION TO WHICH  

• In February a Turkish film, Valley of the Wolves, began to play in German theaters. According to the German magazine idea, the "hero," a sadistic American Christian, Sam Marshall, goes to Iraq.  He claims to have been ordered by Jesus Christ to murder, including children and newlyweds, cutting out body parts and delivering them in Abu Ghraib to a Jewish physician, who sends them to clinics in Tel Aviv, London, and New York.  He is finally dispatched with a crooked dagger by the Turkish hero Polat Alemdar.   It has been a great success in Turkey and among Turks in Germany.  Turkish Parliament Speaker BŸlent Arine called it "a magnificent film, which will go down in the history of the world.  Meanwhile, thirty thousand Turkish protesters burned an effigy of the Danish prime minister to protest the offensive portrayal of Mohammed in a cartoon.  De gustibus non disputandum est.

• Evangelicals and Catholics Together, a group of theologians and scholars from the Roman Catholic Church and several evangelical fellowships, met in New York on April 6 to draft a statement addressing the many ways in which our contemporary Western culture is violating the sanctity of human life.  Some participants wanted to begin by directly addressing the current toll caused by unregulated abortion in America since the passing of Roe v. Wade in 1973, which now tops 40 million. Others wished to speak in more general terms of the dangers to human life and dignity. Inasmuch as both groups regard abortion, however and for whatever reasons performed, as a homicidal act, the present situation is seen as an ongoing and expanding crisis, bringing further disregard of human life in its trail, including euthanasia, "physician assisted suicide," embryo experimentation and destruction, all of which reject the basic Judaeo-Christian conviction that life is a gift of God, given to us to be cherished and respected, not manipulated and marketed.  The participants differed on whether the proposed statement was primarily to address Christians of their several fellowships or to attempt to win the general culture, including, as it was put, "people of good will everywhere."  From the perspective of this editor, it is important to begin with a clear and incisive statement, pointing out the disastrous social and demographic consequences of the current abortion culture, which really is becoming a culture of death, not life.  As St. Paul wrote, "If the trumpet make an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?" (I Corinthians 14:8).  Paul was writing in the context of "speaking in unknown tongues," but his warning holds true in this context as well.

Endnotes:

1 Noonan, John. A Private Choice, The Free Press, New York, NY, 1979, p.12.

2 Ibid., p. 6.

3 Will, George. "The Woeful Roe Ruling," The Raleigh News and Observer, Jan. 15, 2006.

4 An Overview of Abortion in the United States, Alan Guttmacher Institute, June 2005.

5 Hartshorn, Dr. Margaret. "Pregnancy Help Centers: Prevention, Crisis Intervention, Healing — Putting It All Together" in Drawing Board: The Future of the Pro-life Movement, Teresa R. Wagner, ed., St. Augustine's Press, 2003.

6 Ibid.

7 Ramsey, Paul. Ethics at the Edges of Life, Yale University Press, London, Hew Haven, CT, 1980: p. xiv.

8 Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S., 113, 162.

9 Noonan, A Private Choice, p.17.

10 Fletcher, John, MD and Evans, Mark, MD. "Maternal Bonding in Early Fetal Ultrasound Examinations," New England Journal of Medicine, Feb. 17, 1983.

11 Zukin, Cliff. "How Generation X Watches Television," www.rtnda.org/resources/genx/ genhow.htm, 1997.

12 It is too early to tell whether the seven percent drop in the statistics is simply a more accurate read on how ultrasound affects women or an actual decrease.  A survey conducted by Focus on the Family in 2003 found that 79 percent of abortion-minded women choose life after seeing an ultrasound.  As the number of centers offering ultrasound increases, the accuracy of the statistics will improve. 

13 Senander, Mary. "Eugenics Part of Sanger Legacy," Minneapolis Star Tribune. Oct. 14, 1993.

14 Jones, Rachel K., Darroch, Jacqueline E., and Henshaw, Stanley K. "Patterns in the Socioeconomic Characteristics of Women Obtaining Abortions in 2000-2001." The Alan Guttmacher Institute, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (2002) Vol. 34, No. 5: 226-235.

15 Eng, T.R., Butler, W.T., eds. The Hidden Epidemic: Confronting Sexually Transmitted Disease, Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC, National Academy Press: 1997. 

16 Meeker, Dr. Meg. Epidemic: How Teen Sex is Killing Our Kids, (Lifeline Press: 2002).

17 STDs and Pregnancy, http://www.cdc.gov/std/STDFact-STDs&Pregnancy.htm#Common, Centers for Disease Control, March, 2004.

18 McCarthy, Susan K. "Availability of emergency contraception pills at university and college student health centers," Journal of American College Health, July 2002; Vol. 51, Iss. 1, pg. 15.