Running head: Planned Parenthood 1

Planned Parenthood
Cindy Vega
Salt Lake Community College

Planned Parenthood 2
Planned Parenthood
Last year, videos were released that showed Planned Parenthood employees allegedly
speaking of and negotiating the sale of fetal tissue. The footage came about after the Center for
Medical Progress sent two employees out to gather evidence against the organization (Calmes).
Both employees had produced fake California IDs when visiting the Houston Planned
Parenthood Branch, and had even made up a company under the name of Biomax Procurement
Services to pretend to be interested in gathering samples of fetal tissue for scientific use
(Fernandez). All of this lead to Republicans threatening a government shutdown unless funding
for Planned Parenthood got taken away, a total of around $500 million in government funding
(Calmes).
The videos have been analyzed and were found to have been tampered with, having
become an unreliable source. As the case had involved potential unethical practices, with claims
being that fetal tissue was being sold and that there had been terminations of late-term
pregnancies, it was taken to federal court, presented to congressional leaders and to the
committee in charge of the investigation (Calmes). The investigation lead to Planned Parenthood
hiring a transcription service without disclosing that their client would be Planned Parenthood,
and that revealed that the videos posted by CMP had several omissions. This tampering of the
original videos taken, along with the removal of time-frames in each video, made it so that those
videos posted by CMP invalid as a source of legal proof (Calmes).
CMP defended themselves regarding the alterations in the videos, saying that those
omissions were made during bathroom breaks and other breaks and did not invalidate the proof
that Planned Parenthood conducted abortions in order to profit from the fetal tissue (Calmes).
Regardless of their defense, both individuals who had recorded the videos were indicted for

Planned Parenthood 3
tampering with a governmental record and for implying the purchase of human organs
(Fernandez). The footage continued to be invalid in court because it was tampered with. Planned
Parenthood was set loose without any repercussions to the organization, save for a few problems
with the states (Calmes).
One example is Utah. Governor Gary Herbert had tried to block funding towards Planned
Parenthood after the videos were leaked to the public. Once Planned Parenthood saw what was
going on, they sued Herbert in a federal level, winning the case under the 10th Circuit Court of
Appeals. 2-1. They decided that the move to cut funding was fueled to punish Planned
Parenthood out of personal opinions. This would have been against freedom of speech and
association, and couldnt have been supported since the organization had been functioning
legally. The $272,000 in federal funding continues towards Planned Parenthood, and unless there
is a viable reason to discontinue funding, it seems that it will continue that way (Wood).
My views on this are somewhat moderate. While I do believe that, legally speaking, the
first case with Planned Parenthood vs CMP was fair, the fact that the videos had been taken does
bring up concerns over how Planned Parenthood practices ethics. Yes, the videos were tampered
with and yes, those that recorded the videos were found to be guilty of providing faulty
information and licensure, yet they still obtained those videos. Had they approached this
investigation under legal advice, they may have been able to get evidence supporting their sales
of fetal tissue if it existed.
Planned Parenthood reacted well. They were able to act calmly, hiring people to analyze
and transcribe the videos in an unbiased manner. They used that to defend themselves in court in
front of congressional leaders and proved that those videos could not be used in court. At a state
level, they didnt hesitate to sue Gov. Herbert, and while both the governor and the interest group

Planned Parenthood 4
hold opposing views on the matter, it was the interest group that ultimately won, not holding
much if any political power.
The Republican party, or Gov. Herbert, seemed to act slightly irrationally. It makes sense
though. If the case presented itself as favorable to those who had recorded the videos, this would
have been a major win for Republicans who support pro-life ideals. Having a reason to finally
cut funding for Planned Parenthood would seem to help fight against abortions, and that would
have given a favorable view of Herbert among Republicans and those who are pro-life in
general. Even so, it was irrational. Money was wasted in taking the case to court, and that case
ended with the same thing as before.

Planned Parenthood 5
References
Calmes, J. (2015, August 27). Planned Parenthood Videos Were Altered Analysis Finds.
Retrieved October 17, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/us/abortionplanned-parenthood-videos.html?_r=0
Fernandez, M. (2016, January 25). 2 Abortion Foes Behind Planned Parenthood Videos Are
Indicted. Retrieved October 17, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/us/2abortion-foes-behind-planned-parenthood-videos-are-indicted.html
Wood, B. (2016, July 12). As far as we are concerned, the lawsuit is over: Utah Planned
Parenthood says courts ruling on injunction gives group a win over guv. Retrieved
October 17, 2016, from http://www.sltrib.com/home/4109038-155/utahs-plannedparenthood-wins-injunction-against