Choice cited in abortion issue

Re “States fund antiabortion advice,” Feb. 11

The Times correctly noted the millions of tax dollars now funding antiabortion crisis pregnancy centers but left out an intriguing fact. Eric Keroack, just appointed to head the nation’s family planning program, recently served as the medical director of a network of antiabortion centers that received nearly $1.5 million in federal funding to develop and promote abstinence-only programs. Crisis pregnancy centers have become a booming industry nationwide, and Keroack’s new role in charge of federal Title X funds raises the frightening prospect of yet more public funds being diverted to centers that deceive and bully women facing unplanned pregnancies. Scarce tax dollars are far better put toward contraceptive education and services and comprehensive sexuality education programs that support women’s reproductive healthcare needs.

JULIE F. KAY

New York

The writer is a staff attorney with Legal Momentum, which works to advance women’s rights.

*

To reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and thus abortions, there needs to be education on abstinence and contraceptive use as well as affordable contraception and family planning services. This can be provided by agencies that offer abortion as a choice and by those that do not. The goal of both sides is the same: reduce unwanted pregnancies. What makes one method better than another?

As an unwed pregnant teenager, I was grateful that I was provided with options that supported my religious and personal beliefs. I had the opportunity to choose which path I wanted to take. Having both programs available was what gave me the freedom of choice.

ALLYSON FERNSTROM

Ann Arbor, Mich.