Crisis Pregnancy Center Industry
Medical experts call CPCs “legal but unethical” because despite giving “the impression that they are clinical centers, offering legitimate medical services and advice,” CPCs are generally not subject to regulatory oversight that applies to medical facilities, which means low-income pregnant people who may call, chat, or go to a CPC lack privacy protections in addition to likely exposure to false and misleading medical claims, among other harms.
Investment of public money in CPCs is escalating with virtually no government oversight, accountability, or transparency. Today, CPCs in at least 29 states siphon state funding. Investigations into publicly-funded CPCs by advocates and watchdog groups have found evidence of misuse, waste, and potential skimming of funds in multiple states, including Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Texas, and here in Pennsylvania.
Women’s Law Project has been analyzing the crisis pregnancy industry in collaboration with The Alliance: State Advocates for Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and California Women’s Law Center since 2019. We have published multiple studies using original research and will continue to seek to hold crisis pregnancy center industry accountable for both how they target and treat pregnant people and waste public funds.
Research and briefs:
Urgent Brief: The CPC Industry as a Surveillance Tool of the Post-Roe State (February 2022)
The contemporary CPC industry is a nationwide, government-funded, digitally sophisticated network that targets low-income pregnant people who may or may not be considering abortion, collects their sensitive medical and personal information, and feeds it to anti-abortion organizations that store big data without clear privacy protections.
Designed to Deceive: A Study of the Crisis Pregnancy Industry in Nine States (February 2022)
Designed to Deceive is a study of the modern crisis pregnancy center (CPC) industry, focused on the nine states in which Alliance organizations are based. Over the last 20 years, CPCs have expanded in number and power while serving as the anti-abortion movement’s strategic conduit to siphoning increasing amounts of government funds.
Executive Summary (February 2022)
Overview of major findings: CPCs provide virtually no medical care. CPCs routinely promoted false medical claims and used deceptive practices. State-funded CPCs are more harmful than privately funded centers. CPCs appear to be local but are part of a global anti-abortion network.
Key Context: The Anti-Abortion Global Networks Steering the CPC Industry
The contemporary CPCs are plugged into the global anti-abortion movement’s sophisticated digital infrastructure, which facilitates expansion, client surveillance, and systemic, coordinated promotion of anti-abortion disinformation. This companion document is an overview of these organizations.
Original study published in BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health in August, 2021. CPCs do not provide essential care, yet remained open amid the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic despite increased pregnancy’s correlation with risk of severe illness and death.The Alliance study found 59.2% of CPCs in eight states stayed open for in-person visits when non-essential services were ordered closed between April and early June 2020.
Crisis Pregnancy Centers in Pennsylvania
Fact Sheet on CPCs in Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania was the first state to divert public funding to crisis pregnancy centers.
Real Alternatives, Pennsylvania’s state-funded CPC network, has received more than $100 million in public money since the 1990s.
Approximately 156 crisis pregnancy centers are operating in Pennsylvania. Of those, 27 of the state’s 156 (17.3%) crisis pregnancy centers are publicly funded by the state via Real Alternatives, an organization plagued by allegations of misuse of public funds, waste, and lack of transparency.
Nationwide, CPCs now outnumber abortion providers by an average of 3 to 1. In Pennsylvania, thanks to public funding, the ratio is 9 to 1.
Abortion providers located near CPCs report 7x the amount of harassment than providers not located near a CPC.
In addition to millions of dollars funneled to Real Alternatives through a state contract, Pennsylvania is one of a handful of states that double-funds CPCs by diverting Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), safety-net funds earmarked for pregnant people and children in poverty.
Most CPCs in Pennsylvania (64.7%) make false and biased claims, a rate that aligns with CPCs in other states examined in the Alliance Study. The Study defined as false or biased any medical claim that was untrue or unsubstantiated, misstated or selectively cited to factual information, or used gratuitous or graphic language instead of clinical terms. Most (63%) of CPCs in the Real Alternatives network make false and biased medical claims.
Pennsylvania Continues to Fund Real Alternatives Despite Track Record of Misusing Public Funds
In 2017, a Pennsylvania official denounced Real Alternatives for “skimming” public funds. In July 2020, a watchdog group called Campaign for Accountability filed a 27-page public complaint alleging widespread misuse of public funds, waste, and lack of transparency by Real Alternatives.
Real Alternatives was defunded in Michigan in 2019 in response to a similar public complaint.
Pennsylvania double-funded Real Alternatives in FY 2021-2022 without addressing ongoing allegations.
Pennsylvania Continues to Fund Real Alternatives Despite Targeting Pregnant Pennsylvanians for Experimental “Treatments” Medical Experts Call “Unproven” & “Unethical”
In Pennsylvania, 32.0% of CPCs provide, refer for, or promote “abortion pill reversal” (APR). APR is the unrecognized practice of injecting or prescribing high-dose progesterone for pregnant people who have taken the first medicine in the two-step protocol for medication abortion in an attempt to stop (“reverse”) the abortion. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists calls APR “unethical” and “not based on science.” This rogue practice has been called “unproven and experimental” in The New England Journal of Medicine because neither the safety nor effectiveness of APR has been proven in clinical trials.
State-Funded CPCs in Pennsylvania Promote Rogue Experimentation on Pregnant People at Higher Rates than Privately Funded CPCs
Many CPCs in Pennsylvania promote unethical experimentation on vulnerable pregnant people in collusion with state government. Among CPCs supported with public funding via Real Alternatives, 40.7% refer for APR.
Our CPC Accountability Work in the Media
November 6. 2023: NBC 7 San Diego: San Diego County Supervisor leading challenge against local anti-abortion clinics
October 27, 2023: New Mexico Political Report: NMAG signs onto letter in support of Yelp informing the public about crisis pregnancy centers
October 9, 2023: Ms. Magazine: California Brings First-of-its-Kind Lawsuit Against Anti-Abortion Movement’s ‘Abortion Pill Reversal’ Scheme
September 21, 2023: LA Times: California sues religious pregnancy clinics over ‘abortion pill reversal’ claims deemed false
September 20, 2023: Public Notice: How crisis pregnancy centers get millions in tax dollars to perpetuate lies
September 8, 2023: Pittsburgh City Paper: Crisis Pregnancy Centers rake in dark money despite Shapiro’s funding cut
September 3, 2023: Nondoc: ‘Crisis pregnancy centers’ gain support, face new regulations
September 1, 2023: TruthOut: Pennsylvania Governor Ends Contract With Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Crisis Center
May 28, 2023: LA Times: Even in blue California, attempts to regulate controversial antiabortion centers continue to fail
May 22, 2023: Slate: The Decisions We Forget
February 7, 2023: Ms. Magazine: Grassroots Progress to Hold Anti-Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers Accountable
March 2, 2023: KPBS: California is a haven for reproductive rights, but anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers still thrive
January 23, 2023: MPR News: Minnesota, seen as abortion haven, still funds ‘crisis pregnancy centers’
January 19, 2023: Popsugar: How to Spot a Crisis Pregnancy Center, and Why It Matters More Post-Roe
January 19, 2023: KQED: The Anti-Abortion Movement Next Door
2022
December 15, 2022: Reveal: How Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers Can Claim to Be Medical Clinics and Get Away With It
November 30, 2022: The Cap Times: Do crisis pregnancy centers help women or mislead them?
November 25, 2022: The Stranger: Washington Must Hold Crisis Pregnancy Centers Accountable
September 30, 2022: Daily Hampshire Gazette: ‘Crisis pregnancy centers’ face new scrutiny, accountability
September 6, 2022: Penn Capital-Star: State lawmakers, experts discuss deceptive practices, misinformation from anti-abortion centers
September 6, 2022: PoliticsPA: Allentown City Council Delays Votes on Abortion Rights Ordinances
August 28, 2022: Twin Cities Pioneer Press: Anti-abortion pregnancy centers in Minnesota pose medical information privacy risk
August 24, 2022: Prism Reports: So-called “crisis pregnancy centers” are surveilling clients and may help criminalize them, reproductive advocates say
August 23, 2022: KARE-11: Attorney General Keith Ellison issues consumer warning for crisis pregnancy centers
August 22, 2022: Stat News: The Biden-Harris Administration Needs to End Fake Abortion Clinics
August 21, 2022: Allentown Morning Call: Allentown wants. to label crisis pregnancy centers. What are these groups, and. how do they operate in the Lehigh Valley region?
August 19, 2022: Axios: Anti-abortion pregnancy centers are expanding in the post-Roe era
August 17, 2022: Bloomberg: Google Maps Regularly Misleads People Searching for Abortion Clinics
July 7, 2022: Louisiana Illuminator: Legal organization warns of crisis centers preying on people seeking abortions
July 3, 2022: Daily Kos: Big data is making so-called ‘crisis pregnancy centers’ more dangerous than ever
June 28, 2022: Yahoo: Crisis pregnancy centers prey on people looking for abortions, but don’t offer them. Here’s how to spot one.
June 27, 2022: Bloomberg: Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data
June 27, 2022: U.S. News & World Report: Anti-Abortion Centers to Grow, Wield More Influence Post-Roe
June 22, 2022: TIME Magazine: Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers Are Collecting Troves of Data That Could Be Weaponized Against Women
June 22, 2022: LA Times: States Must Stop Deceptive Crisis Pregnancy Centers
May 6, 2022: Jezebel: How Crisis Pregnancy Centers Help Anti-Abortion Legislatures
April 11, 2022: Ms. Magazine: The Threat of Crisis Pregnancy Centers Will Escalate in a Post-Roe U.S.
April 10, 2022: WITF: Pennsylvania groups are touting abortion pill reversal. Doctors say there’s no evidence it works
February 25, 2022: Williamsport Sun-Gazette: Lawmaker would restrict crisis pregnancy centers
February 23, 2022: Hampshire Gazette: Anti-abortion ‘crisis pregnancy centers’ threaten women’s health, privacy
February 14, 2022: Regulatory Review: Crisis Pregnancy Centers, State-Funded Harm, and State-Based Solutions
February 12, 2022: Salon: Anti-abortion movement’s big plan: Supercharged “crisis pregnancy centers” and data harvesting
February 4, 2022: National Catholic Register: Crisis-Pregnancy Center Lawsuit in Connecticut May Affect Abortion Alternatives Elsewhere
February 1, 2022: Public Health Watch: While Future of Texas Abortion Clinics Hangs in Balance, Public Funding Pours Into Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers
January 6, 2022: Jezebel: Crisis Pregnancy Centers Are Spying on Pregnant People, New Study Says
January 28, 2022: Buzzfeed: Experts Say Crisis Pregnancy Centers Could Spy On And Report Women Seeking An Abortion
January 20, 2022: ABC Action News: Confusion surrounding pregnancy centers, abortion services grows
January 4, 2022: New Mexico Political Report: Crisis pregnancy centers are a public health danger, according to a report
2021
December 23, 2021: Religion News: California’s abortion sanctuary plans decried by Christian groups
December 15, 2021: Women’s Media Center: The Anti-Abortion Movement’s Digital Strategies to Track Pregnant Women
October 29, 2021: Ms Magazine: Crisis Pregnancy Centers Endanger Women’s Health—With Taxpayer Dollars and Without Oversight
October 29, 2022: The 19h News: Crisis Pregnancy Center Ultrasounds are Free, But Are They Accurate?
October 28, 2021: Penn Capital-Star: With almost no oversight, anti-abortion groups get millions in Pa. tax dollars
October 25, 2021: Philadelphia Inquirer: Pa. uses taxpayer money to fund antiabortion organization
Designed to Deceive cited in accountability actions, hearings, and legislation:
May 13, 2023: Congresswoman Mary Gay Scanlon submitted Designed to Deceive as testimony in Revisiting the Implications of the FACE Act, a hearing hosted by the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government (Committee on the Judiciary) in the U.S. House of Representatives.
April 20, 2023: Designed to Deceive cited in the text of the federal Stop Anti-Abortion Disinformation (SAD) Act, which would ban false advertising related to abortion services by crisis pregnancy centers by directing the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prohibit deceptive or misleading advertising related to the provision of abortion services and collect penalties from organizations in violation.
August 22, 2022: Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison cites Designed to Deceive in a consumer alert that warns Minnesotans about the dangers of anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers.
June 1, 2022: California Attorney General Rob Bonta cites Designed to Deceive in a Consumer Alert warning Californians of the dangers of anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers.
