Fox Valley Families Against Planned Parenthood

Why PP Series #1: PP Shelters Child Predators and Rapists

Posted by Corrina Gura on Friday, October 17th, 2008

Lila Rose from the Bill O'Rielly interview via YoutubeI think this is a good place to start, since it's been splashed all over YouTube and every pro-lifer has already heard at least some of these stories. The YouTube videos tell the story much better than my words can, so I'm not going to write a whole lot on this one.

Lila Rose, a pro-life UCLA student produced an excellent exposé video, posing as a 15 year old girl who was having sex with a much older man. Planned Parenthood workers were more than happy to help her cover up the statutory rape.

In North Carolina, two young women posed as 15 year old girls who had sex with a 30 year old man recorded their encounters with Planned Parenthood employees. Even though in both cases the employees said they would have to report this as statutory rape, when Students for Life filed a Freedom of Information Request for all reports of statutory rape in that time period, no such reports were filed. Check out the video on YouTube while it lasts. It's also available on Eye Blast, since YouTube keeps taking this video down.

Life Dynamics recorded a series of phone calls revealing that abortion industry workers either ignored the girl's age or coached her on how to lie about it. (Read the full report for more information. Note that not all of these clinics are operated by PP.)

Now, in case you think this isn't a big deal and that not many girls are impacted by this, according to the Guttmacher Institute's Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States, 17% of all abortions are performed on minors. With 1.21 million abortions having been performed in 2005, that's about 200,000 abortions on underage girls each year.

Links for further information:
The Ohio Supreme Court is currently hearing the cases of two girls who were brought in for abortions by their adult male rapists-one was the girl's soccer coach, the other was her father. Even after telling PP officials that they had been raped, their cases were never reported to authorities and the girls continued to be abused.

Be sure to look for other Lila Rose videos, including her interview with Hannity and Colmes, the interview on The O'Reilly Factor, her speech to the Values Voter Summit, and the news story on Vent

This interview with Phill Klein is also really interesting. He details what actions he has taken to prosecute child rapists and how difficult it has been to obtain information. He speaks on the importance of electing pro-life district attorneys, who have the ability to prosecute-or neglect to prosecute-crimes.

This entry was posted on Friday, October 17th, 2008 at 12:30 pm and is filed under Miscellaneous, Planned Parenthood. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

10 Responses to “Why PP Series #1: PP Shelters Child Predators and Rapists”

  1. Corrina says:

    Student, [reposted from Why PP series main blog] you claim that they are prevented from reporting child rape when in fact it's exactly the opposite! PP and other health care workers are mandatory reporters. Note that the North Carolina encounter should have triggered mandatory reporting.

    October 18th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
  2. Student says:

    PP shelters child predators and rapists? Apparently there really are places that cover up child abuse and rape. Here’s one!
    Funny, you would think children would be safe here, huh!?!!

    Who knew you could learn about sex in church!?!!

    And it doesn’t matter if you’re male or female. We’re equal opportunity abusers.

    Wow! It’s not only the priests but the nuns too!

    It even happens in Arkansas.

    Now as to the reporting requirements, HIPAA does, in many circumstances, conflict with state law. Given that HIPAA is a federal law, it overrides the state law. As to the particular piece of evidence you point to, mandatory reporters are required to report abuse and it “is defined to only include those acts perpetrated by a child’s parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker.” Thus, the mandatory reporting requirement would not kick in for a boyfriend.

    As to the Ohio cases, your link doesn’t work and I was unable to look at it.

    October 21st, 2008 at 6:06 pm
  3. Corrina says:

    Student:

    Whew, I was beginning to wonder if I’d get any responses on this blog!

    Fortunately, many of the cases of sexual abuse are things that took place in the 60’s and 70’s-—I don’t mean it’s fortunate that they happened, but it’s a sign that much of what happened is no longer happening. Yes, the Catholic Church made mistakes (particularly in covering up the harms), but they are trying to atone for them and make amends, to whatever extent they can. (Church volunteers are now required to participate in training, such as the Virtus Program to educate people about child abuse and to prevent any more children from being harmed.)

    However, all of your examples are simply a red herring–they are an effort to shift the debate to something else (the Catholic Church) instead of discussing the point at hand: whether PP should be criticized (or worse) for failing to report child abuse. I do hope that nobody bites and makes this into a discussion of religion, which seems to be where you feel more comfortable debating, if your posts elsewhere are any indication.

    The fact that Catholic dioceses that participated in cover-ups are being sued and fined makes me think that the same should be done to PP: girls who were forced to go there as minors who didn’t receive protections should sue PP for failure to protect them. That’s what they’re doing in Ohio now (I fixed the original link too).

    I’m going to have to spend some time digging into the HIPAA requirements to respond to your post fully.

    October 22nd, 2008 at 9:53 am
  4. Student says:

    Fortunately, many of the cases of sexual abuse are things that took place in the 60’s and 70’s-—I don’t mean it’s fortunate that they happened, but it’s a sign that much of what happened is no longer happening. Yes, the Catholic Church made mistakes (particularly in covering up the harms), but they are trying to atone for them and make amends, to whatever extent they can.

    Many cases of sexual abuse took place in the 60's and 70's — and many others took place subsequent to that time period. The RCC only attempted to make ammends after being repeatedly sued. Had litigation not taken place, the cover up would have continued. The deposition of Cardinal George was quite illuminating on this subject.

    I understand why you feel the RCC abuse is a red herring and, to some extent, it probably is. However, it also shows your hypocrisy on the topic. Furthermore, I fully addressed your charges as to HIPAA and mandatory reporting.

    The fact that Catholic dioceses that participated in cover-ups are being sued and fined makes me think that the same should be done to PP:

    If it's really happening, I would agree. However, you've yet to offer any real evidence. I read the link on the Ohio cases and did some further research. The examples you site are CIVIL cases only — no criminal action has been filed. This means the State's Attorney found no criminal conduct. As to civil suits, anyone can file one for just about any reason. It's my opinion we need significant reform in this area.

    If you're really interested in reviewing HIPAA,you can get accurate information here.

    October 22nd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
  5. Corrina says:

    "Now as to the reporting requirements, HIPAA does, in many circumstances, conflict with state law. Given that HIPAA is a federal law, it overrides the state law."

    Student:
    I visited the HHS site you referred me to. In their FAQ I found the following question and answer:
    My State law authorizes health care providers to report suspected child abuse to the State Department of Health and Social Services. Does the HIPAA Privacy Rule preempt this State law?
    Answer:
    No. The Privacy Rule permits covered health care providers and other covered entities to disclose reports of child abuse or neglect to public health authorities or other appropriate government authorities. … [If] it is impossible for a covered entity to comply with both the Privacy Rule and the State law… the Administrative Simplification Rules specifically provide an exception to preemption of State law."

    Also: OCR/HIPAA Privacy/Security/Enforcement Regulation Text Page 4-5:
    Section 160.203 General Rule and Exemptions. A standard, requirement, or implementation specification adopted under this subchapter that is contrary to a provision of State law preempts the provision of State law. This general rule applies, except if one or more of the following conditions is met: … (c) The provision of State law, including State procedures established under such law, as applicable, provides for the reporting of… child abuse”

    Now, I'm no law student, but this seems to ON POINT refute your claim.

    October 22nd, 2008 at 3:52 pm
  6. Student says:

    Corina,
    I would agree with your above post were it not for one thing, abuse (for mandatory reporting purposes) under the state law "is defined to only include those acts perpetrated by a child’s parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker." Thus, in the situation you described, reporting is NOT required. Therefore, HIPAA kicks in.

    October 22nd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
  7. Corrina says:

    I agree that the definition you give of child abuse (“defined to only include those acts perpetrated by a child’s parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker”) is applicable for the North Carolina case.
    But if this is the working definition, why would the person in the video say (paraphrased) “you understand that this is statutory rape and I have to report it?” Does PP of North Carolina provide such faulty training to its employees that they don’t know that they don’t have to report such abuse? Or, my guess is, it’s that the mother’s live-in boyfriend qualifies as a custodian or caretaker, that’s why they say they have to report it.

    The definition of statutory rape in California (Lila Rose’s location) is much broader and clearer:
    "Mandated reporters are required to report all instances where they know of or observe a child that they know or reasonably suspect to have been the victim of child abuse. The definition of child abuse within the statutes includes sexual abuse and makes specific reference to the offenses listed in the previous section. The statute applies regardless of the defendant’s relationship to the victim. However, mandatory reporters are only required to report consensual sexual activity involving minors under the following circumstances:
    Unlawful sexual intercourse when the victim is less than 16 years of age and the defendant is at least 21 years of age. … Lewd or lascivious acts where the victim is between 14 and 15 years of age and the defendant is at least 10 years older than the victim." (See Lewin Group, Statutory Rape: A Guide to State Laws and Reporting Requirements. Prepared for: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services, p. 26-27.

    That’s why PP staffers told Lila to hide the fact that she was 15—because 16 is the minimum age of consent in CA.

    October 23rd, 2008 at 10:23 am
  8. Corrina says:

    “I read the link on the Ohio cases and did some further research. The examples you site are CIVIL cases only — no criminal action has been filed. This means the State's Attorney found no criminal conduct. As to civil suits, anyone can file one for just about any reason.”

    Are the cases against the Catholic Church that you cited above criminal or civil? It seems to me from reading the articles (I don’t have access to LexisNexis or any other law databases) that these are not filed by state prosecutors, but by individuals seeking redress for harms—in which case the same is true, in the cases of the Church, “the State’s Attorney found no criminal conduct.”

    “Many cases of sexual abuse took place in the 60's and 70's — and many others took place subsequent to that time period. The RCC only attempted to make amends after being repeatedly sued.”

    Like I said before, this is just another reason people (girls) should keep stepping forward to sue PP! Maybe if enough minors sue PP for not protecting them/failure to report, they’ll finally do something to protect these girls!

    “I understand why you feel the RCC abuse is a red herring and, to some extent, it probably is. However, it also shows your hypocrisy on the topic.”

    I don’t understand why you believe I’m being hypocritical. I don’t like when children are abused, no matter where they are; I said that above too. But, I’m glad that the Catholic Church has cleaned itself up. Now I just wish PP would do the same.

    October 23rd, 2008 at 10:32 am
  9. Student says:

    But if this is the working definition, why would the person in the video say (paraphrased) “you understand that this is statutory rape and I have to report it?” Does PP of North Carolina provide such faulty training to its employees that they don’t know that they don’t have to report such abuse? Or, my guess is, it’s that the mother’s live-in boyfriend qualifies as a custodian or caretaker, that’s why they say they have to report it.

    Unless I misunderstood the video (which was grainy and had volume problems), the boyfriend was 22. Are you suggesting this is her mother’s live-in boyfriend? If so, why?

    As to PP’s training in NC, I have no way of knowing what that’s like and to comment on it would be disingenuous on my part.

    The definition of statutory rape in California (Lila Rose’s location) is much broader and clearer:

    My reading of the statute agrees with yours. Under CA law, mandatory reporting is required in this case and I would have no problem with the institution of litigation under these circumstances.

    October 23rd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
  10. Student says:

    Are the cases against the Catholic Church that you cited above criminal or civil? It seems to me from reading the articles (I don’t have access to LexisNexis or any other law databases) that these are not filed by state prosecutors, but by individuals seeking redress for harms—in which case the same is true, in the cases of the Church, “the State’s Attorney found no criminal conduct.”

    Does the name John Geoghan mean anything to you? He was a catholic priest criminally charged and sentenced to prison. Fr Michael Glennon was criminally convicted on 5 counts of sexual abuse. Rev. Gary E. Underwood, a former priest at St. Odilia's Catholic Church was given a mandatory prison sentence in Arizona. I can go on, but you get the point!

    Like I said before, this is just another reason people (girls) should keep stepping forward to sue PP! Maybe if enough minors sue PP for not protecting them/failure to report, they’ll finally do something to protect these girls!

    If PP is breaking the law, I have no problem whatsoever with legal prosecution.

    I don’t understand why you believe I’m being hypocritical. I don’t like when children are abused, no matter where they are; I said that above too. But, I’m glad that the Catholic Church has cleaned itself up. Now I just wish PP would do the same.

    Would you allow your child to go into the home of a child predator? How about a home with multiple child predators? I wouldn’t – and certainly wouldn’t allow them inside a catholic church, nor would I ever allow them to be alone with a priest.

    Now, if PP has broken the law but not reporting something they should, they should be prosecuted. However, I’ve yet to hear of any child being raped inside a PP facility.

    October 23rd, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Pregnant? Need help? Hurt by abortion? Call 1-800-848-LOVE, 24 hours.