Family-planning groups fear impact of abortion restrictions on U.S. aid 

EUN-KYUNG KIM, AP 23jan01

WASHINGTON -- The abortion restrictions President Bush imposed on U.S. international aid are more likely to increase teen pregnancies in Europe and the spread of AIDS in Africa than decrease abortions overseas, critics said Tuesday.

A 1973 law prohibits the use of taxpayer funds for any abortion service, both in the U.S. and abroad. On Monday, Bush tightened restrictions further to ban U.S. aid from going to international groups that use their own money to perform abortions or advocate abortion rights.

``A wide range of health services is being jeopardized by a narrow and misguided focus on abortion, which is not the issue here,'' said Kate Bourne of Pathfinder International, a family planning group with programs in eight countries.

In addition to providing medical services such as gynecological screenings and health care for AIDS victims, many of the private foreign organizations supported by Pathfinder provide contraceptives and family planning to women in developing countries.

Many, but not all, of these groups provide abortion services and will now ``have to choose between continuing to provide family planning services -- and sacrifice their principles -- or maintain their rights to speak freely and give up the funding,'' Bourne said. She called the choice ``a devil's bargain.''

Former presidents Reagan and Bush were the first to enforce the rule, but former President Clinton repealed it during his administration. His successor reinstated the ban on his first full day on the job.

``This is really brushing off a dusty Reagan-era policy and reinstating it at the dawn of the 21st century in total ignorance to the changes that have taken place in the world in close to a decade,'' said Sally Ethelston of Population Action International, a group advocating voluntary family planning.

Ethelston noted that Russia and many of the former Soviet republics in Eastern Europe relied heavily on abortion in the past but now get U.S. aid for family planning services.

``Anyone knows that these are countries where for many years abortion was the only method of fertility regulation that was available,'' Ethelston said. ``If we deny funds to groups in those countries, it may actually increase abortions. We'd basically be cutting off our nose to spite our face.''

But abortion opponent Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said the reinstated restrictions won't take ``one single penny'' from family planning services.

``Americans do not want to be in the business of promoting the agenda of abortion on demand,'' said Smith spokesman Andy Napoli. ``Organizations that are doing family planning, which is a worthwhile activity, have to make a decision: Are they primarily about family planning, or are they primarily about abortion?''

Rep. Nita Lowey, a New York Democrat who plans to introduce legislation to repeal the funding restrictions, disagreed.

``This is not about abortion. ... It is about access to contraception. It is about freedom of speech. The global gag rule will destroy both,'' she said during a news conference with other congressional lawmakers. ``It would be unconstitutional if imposed in this country, and it is dangerous and immoral to force it on others.''