Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services

Congresswoman Carol Maloney (D-NY) has introduced a bill titled the “Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services Act” [HR2478] which is intended to address “false advertising” practices of Crisis Pregnancy Centers, or CPCs. The bill’s main section:

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING OF ABORTION SERVICES.
(a) Conduct Prohibited- Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission shall promulgate rules to prohibit, as an unfair and deceptive act or practice, any person from advertising with the intent to deceptively create the impression that such person is a provider of abortion services if such person does not provide abortion services.

 

(b) Enforcement- The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce the rules required under subsection (a) as if a violation of such rules were a violation of section 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1). The Commission shall enforce such rules in the same manner and by the same means, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and made a part of this Act.

RHRealityCheck has an informative piece on the issue for background:

Certain CPCs, many of which receive federal funding, use deceptive advertising practices to give the appearance that they are legitimate medical clinics that provide a variety of reproductive health care services, including family planning and abortion care.

 

In reality, most CPCs do not provide full options counseling and generally will not refer for abortion care or birth control. Their deceptive advertising practices include intentionally placing advertisements under the “abortion services” heading of phone and internet directories, choosing names that are similar to abortion clinics to confuse women about what types of services they provide, and posting misleading advertisements about the types of services and referrals that they provide.

CPCs have also been accused of providing false information about health effects of abortion, such as claiming there is a link between abortion and cancer that national cancer organizations have said does not exist. Rep. Maloney says,

“Although I may disagree with their views, many crisis pregnancy centers are forthright and respectful and they have a right to exist. Unfortunately, some take a more underhanded approach to lure in women seeking abortions by using tactics that should be illegal. Many women who face unwanted pregnancies find themselves in a very difficult, very personal situation. They shouldn’t have to face the added stress of deciphering whether or not the clinic they choose offers legitimate medical services.”

A report [PDF] was released last July by a House committee on misleading information provided by federally-funded pregnancy resource centers. 23 female investigators contacted these “clinics” posing as 17-year-old pregnant girls trying to make a decision about their pregnancy. They found that 20 of 23 centers contacted provided false or misleading information about the health effects of abortion, including false information about a link to breast cancer, reduced future fertility, and mental health.

Despite [the] medical consensus, eight centers warned the caller that having an abortion would increase her risk of breast cancer. For example, one center told the caller that “all abortion causes an increased risk of breast cancer in later years.” Another center said that research shows a “far greater risk” of breast cancer after an abortion. One center told the caller that there is an “extremely high, increased risk of breast cancer” that “can be as much as an 80% increase depending upon how the risk factors fall into place.” A second center stated that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer by 50%. A third center asserted that an abortion elevates the average lifetime risk of breast cancer by 50%.

Centers also played up possible mental health effects, which studies have refuted, suggesting that mental health status post-abortion is more tied to the woman’s overall mental health than the abortion itself, and that long-term psychiatric harm has not been demonstrated. Nonetheless, the report found CPCs downplaying postpartum depression, while exaggerating effects of abortion:

In contrast, the center asserted that only 3% of women who have full-term pregnancies seek psychiatric care for short-lived post-partum depression, explaining:
Having a baby is a normal process and what it does is fulfills a woman. It is fulfilling one of the roles that she has. Abortion is the exact opposite; she is doing something totally contrary to what her role is. That’s why it has such an emotional impact on women.
One center compared the experience of having an abortion to the experience of going to war, analogizing the post-traumatic stress experienced after an abortion to that seen in soldiers after Vietnam, and said that it “is something that anyone who’s had an abortion is sure to suffer from.

The report addresses a very small sample of CPCs nationwide, but the problems found in the limited investigation are what the Act is intended to address. CPCs can support pregnant women if they want, but they need to show respect for women first by not lying to them.