More facts, less emotion

In the April 23 S-R Roundtable, I read a guest opinion piece entitled “Defunding threatens women’s health”.

The author uses alarming predictions about the future, supported by “facts”, in an emotional appeal suggesting that the debate is “misled by people with political agendas”.

One of the author’s facts is the often cited, and often-rebutted claim that “97 percent of Planned Parenthood’s budget goes to providing basic health care to women and men in need”. A 2015 fact- check article in the Washington Post calls the statistic misleading for counting clients every time they receive a service, treating all services as equivalent when there are “obvious differences,” and for having “no accurate way to measure how much Planned Parenthood’s activities comprise abortions.”

It is difficult to find unbiased information sources that enable informed decision-making in such a complex issue. It is not a stretch to recognize the issue is not simply a question of the right to be healthy when the right to human life is also at stake.

For those who are interested in thoughtful, comprehensive consideration of the implications of public policy, emotionally crafted, one-sided soundbites (on both sides of the debate) with readily refuted statistics are too easily found. As a woman, mother, nurse and independent thinker, I desire less emotion and more studied attention to facts that speak to the complexity of the issue.

Jane Wallace

Spokane