Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

April-09-10

Austin, TX Becomes Second City to Enact "Truth in Advertising" Law For CPCs

Austin's City Council approved "truth in advertising" for crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) Thursday, making the capital of Texas the second city in the US to enact the law. The ordinance states that "The Owner or Operator [of a CPC] shall prominently display, at the entrance of the Center, two black and white signs, one in English and one in Spanish, that state as follows: 'This center does not provide abortion or refer to abortion providers. This center does not provide or refer to providers of US Food and Drug Administration approved birth control drugs and medical devices.'" According to The Austin Chronicle, the bill was proposed by Council Member Bill Spelman and co-sponsored by Council Members Laura Morrison and Mike Martinez.

Currently, there are an estimated 3,500 CPCs nationwide, most of which are affiliated with one or more national umbrella organizations. CPCs pose as legitimate health centers and offer "free" pregnancy tests. Some CPCs coerce and intimidate women out of considering abortion as an option, and prevent women from receiving neutral and comprehensive medical advice. These clinics are typically run by anti-abortion volunteers who are not licensed medical professionals.

According to The Statesman, Blake Rocap of NARAL Pro-Choice Texas told the council, "If a pregnant woman has decided that she's not going to have an abortion, then this sort of signage isn't going to dissuade her. This [ordinance] just asks the centers to be honest about the services they do and don't provide."

Violators of this law could face Class C misdemeanors handled by Municipal Court and fines of up to $450 per offense, Spelman told The Statesman.

A similar "truth in advertising" bill is being considered in Montgomery County, Maryland. Baltimore became the first city to enact such a law in January 2010. The city of Baltimore is currently being sued by the Archdiocese of Baltimore. Archbishop Edwin O'Brien said in the Baltimore Sun that the ordinance violates the CPCs' First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion, and it "is hurting the good people volunteering and giving so much of their resources to come to the help of pregnant women."

Media Resources: The Austin Chronicle 4/9/10; Feminist Daily Newswire 4/5/10, 12/8/09; Choice Campus Leadership Program: Campaign To Expose Fake Clinics Toolkit; The Statesman 4/8/10; Baltimore Sun 3/30/10


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

4/18/2014 Texas Hospitals Revoke Admitting Privileges to Abortion Providers - Reproductive health access in Texas continues to vanish in the wake of HB 2, the omnibus anti-abortion bill that, among other things, requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges in order to keep their clinics open. . . .
 
4/18/2014 Dartmouth President Calls For Changes In Wake of Federal Sexual Assault Investigation - Dartmouth College President Phil Hanlon gave a powerful speech Wednesday night calling for significant changes on campus in light of its high rates of sexual assault, high-risk drinking, and discriminatory social scene. "Darmouth's promise is being hijacked by high-risk and harmful behaviors, behaviors that are hurting too many of our students, dividing us as a community and distracting from our important work of teaching and learning," Hanlon said. . . .
 
4/17/2014 Federal Court Permanently Blocks North Dakota's Extreme 6-Week Abortion Ban - A federal district court permanently blocked one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the nation yesterday, calling it "invalid and unconstitutional." The North Dakota law, HB 1456, directly challenged Roe v. . . .