A former director of a Texas Planned Parenthood branch who resigned after she watched an ultrasound-guided abortion told WND the clinic was pushing employees to strive for abortion quotas to boost profits.
"There are definitely client goals," former clinic director Abby Johnson said. "We'd have a goal every month for abortion clients and for family planning clients."

Johnson, 29, said the Bryan, Texas, Planned Parenthood clinic performed surgical abortions every other Saturday, but it began expanding access to abortion to increase earnings.

"One of the ways they were able to up the number of patients that they saw was they started doing the RU-486 chemical abortions all throughout the week," she said.

RU-486 chemical abortions kill the lining of the uterus, cutting off oxygen and nutrients, resulting in the death of an unborn baby. Johnson said the chemical abortion costs the same as an early first-trimester abortion: between $505 and $695 for each procedure.

She told WND the clinic was experiencing financial difficulties due to the economic downturn.

"Abortion is the most lucrative part of Planned Parenthood's operations," she said. "Even though they're two separate corporations, all of the money goes into one pot. With the family planning corporation really suffering, they depend on the abortion corporation to balance their budget, help get them out of the hole and help make income for the company."

She continued, "They really wanted to increase the number of abortions so that they could increase their income."

Now Planned Parenthood has retaliated against Johnson, filing a restraining order against her because the clinic fears she may leak confidential information.

The Brazos Valley Coalition for Life, a pro-life group that recently moved its headquarters several hundred feet away from the clinic, is named on the temporary restraining order as well. The injunction temporarily prevents her from releasing information until after a hearing scheduled for Nov. 10 in the 85th District Court.

Planned Parenthood claimed in court documents that Johnson copied private personnel files and other documents before she quit her position Oct. 6. The abortion provider's lawyers expressed concern that Johnson would disclose client medical records, doctor information and clinic security procedures. The restraining order contends Planned Parenthood would be irreparably harmed by an information leak.

However, Johnson told WND, "I don't have any confidential documents, so I'm not sharing anything because I don't have anything. I have no patient information. I'd never do anything to compromise patient safety or confidentiality. For them to even make that type of statement is so offensive."

Planned Parenthood of Southeast Houston released the following statement Oct. 30: "We regret being forced to turn to the courts to protect the safety and confidentiality of our clients and staff, however, in this instance, it is absolutely necessary."

Johnson said she's not sure why Planned Parenthood is so concerned.

"Planned Parenthood is an organization that really runs on fear. If somebody crosses them, they are quick to threaten that person. I've worked for them for a long time and seen them threaten lawsuits multiple times," she said. "I'm not sure what they're scared of. When I first got the restraining order, I was so surprised. My initial response was, what do they think I know? What are they feeling guilty about?"

Asked whether she believes Planned Parenthood is concerned that information about its quotas will become public, Johnson responded, "Probably, yeah. I think they're just scared of the whole thing."

She said she believes the injunction is simply a scare tactic meant to keep her quiet.

"Clearly, that kind of backfired," she said.

Johnson explained that she resigned after she saw an ultrasound-guided abortion in which an unborn baby was vacuumed out of a woman's uterus.

"Ultrasound-guided abortions are not typically done in Planned Parenthood abortion centers because they're more time-consuming, and that's just not something that centers like that do," she said. "I'd never seen one of those done before. For whatever reason, the physician had called me back to assist with the procedure. When I saw that, that was really when my heart was changed."

Johnson, who was employed at the clinic for eight years and served as a director for two years, said the issue of abortion was "unsettling" for her the whole time she worked with Planned Parenthood. She said she kept "pushing down the guilt" and felt spiritually unsettled.

"There's no religion and there's no spirituality in an abortion clinic. There can't be," she said. "Whatever side you are on, pro-life or pro-choice, it is what it is – and that's taking a human life."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115000

=========

I am all for free choice for each person and more personal freedoms and individual liberty for people, but I don't think that "quotas" are exactly right when it comes to abortion. I thought these people were supposed to provide resources and information for people so that they could make informed decisions. It is not right to have quotas - as if it's a Sales job they have at Planned Parenthood. I know that they make money off of abortions, etc, but this sort of thing should never be run as a corporation.

I know abortion has been discussed before, and this isn't a thread to necessarily discuss the right/wrong aspect of abortion. This is more to discuss the quotas and Planned Parenthood.

I am very Pro-Life. It's disguisting that they have a quota they try to met. Absolutely disguisting! If you believe having an abortion is different from murder, then google "aborted babies" images & you come back & tell me it is right! A baby even at 11 weeks, has tiny fingers, toes, nose, eyes, & a mouth. You tell me babies cannot feel pain in the womb. Well when I was pregnant with my daughter, if I got in a tight spot, or pushed on one side of my belly she would move to the other side trying to protect herself from the pressure. So don't tell me they don't feel anything!

I'm pro-choice because women are going to have abortions whether or not it's legal. Much rather it be safe than it be some sketchy dude at his filthy house doing it with a vacuum and a hanger.

Making abortion illegal would dramatically decrease the number of abortions. If women get illegal dirty abortions than they brought things on themselves. I mean you can't change what some people will do, but if we started putting those women in jail for killing their unborn children than maybe they will think twice before doing it. It's like any other laws, someone is ALWAYS going to break them, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have them in place.

Okay, well let's think about it like this.

Let's say making abortion illegal would cut abortion rated by 50% (which is a generous number considering the amount of women who would have an abortion regardless of what the law says). Consider the nature of illegal abortions and how they'd be performed, especially when making it illegal would render having a medical license a non-issue for "doctors" (note how it's in quotes). How many women would be killing themselves as well as their unborn babies.

Would you make it illegal for these women to get proper medical support? Would the women even go for proper medical support if abortions were illegal? We'd be cutting the mortality rates of babies in half, sure, but we'd the mortality rate in pregnant women would skyrocket.

I mean, you really must visualize the effects of a law beyond how you feel about unborn babies. No one ever thought about the ramifications of making alcohol illegal, and look what that did.

I highly doubt as many women as you think would have illegal abortions. People are going to hurt themselves regardless. Of course it would be inhumane not to treat those you had suffered from an illegal abortion. I guess we would have to take statistics into account when trying to give a proper guess as to how many women would try to have illegal abortions. I think it would play into educational background & social-economical status as to how many women would get dangerous abortions of like the scenrio you spoke of in your original post. Most of the women now getting abortions are the ones who can afford them & from what I have heard they are not inexpensive. In general, I would predict those who were in a high social-economical class would have the education & intelligence not to put themselves at risk like that.

*who instead of you in my second line

Regardless, I wouldn't want to put women of rape in a situation they were forced to be in.

Also, what about the people of low-class social and educational backgrounds? Should we forget about them? Like I said, 50% was a fairly generous number, but it doesn't take away from the fact that more women would die than babies, which wouldn't help the situation.

People in that low social-economical class can not afford abortions, so making them illegal would not effect them either way.

Wait, I just realized how double-standard that seemed. What I meant to say is another way of decreasing the amount of dangerous illegal abortions that you speak of is making birth control more accesible to the poor & un-insured. Because like I said most poor people can not afford $850 (on average) to have an abortion. It's easier to get an illegal abortion or go down to the welfare office & apply for government health insurance, food stamps, TANF, & all that.

Okay, while sometimes untrue, I'll grant you that premise. What about people of middle-class backgrounds? That tier of people is so big, anything could be possible, and really, it's the only class of people that really matter in this situation (according to your premise) seeing as it's the vast, vast majority.

All the classes of people matter to me. Middle class people are the ones who should be able to afford birth control & other alternatives. Also, if they did get pregnant & not want to keep the baby then they should be able to at least take care of themselves until the baby is born & give them a loving home, but now we are getting into the nitty gritty, because some people do not believe women should have to carry a baby full term that they do not want. This is my opinon and my opinion only so don't jump down my throat. I think it is selfish to abort a baby just because you don't want it, you should at least have the baby to give a childless couple something they long for so bad. The only things that don't sit well with me are the ones who abort because of rape. I think it's a very hard thing to do to carry your rapist's baby. But then again, I don't think an innocent child should have to pay for what a rapist done. It's just a very hard thing to deal with. I might seem uncompassionate to the mother, but I am a victim of sexual abuse, & if I had become pregnant I would have not aborted the baby. I would not want my child to pay for something someone else did to me. Some women may not be that strong.

I'm not jumping down your throat. I wasn't even aware this discussion was even getting heated... :|

Anyway, while this is a matter of opinion, and opinion ONLY, I could come out and say that it wouldn't matter to the fetus at all because the fetus has no complex thoughts or memory. I mean, neither does a baby. Effectively, you'd be killing the formation of a SHELL of a person. I mean, sure, the brain is developing basic functions like absorbing food, the heart beating, and blood flow, but so does a person who is in a vegetative state. If it doesn't matter to a person in a vegetative state, I don't think it would be considered selfish to abort a baby for any reason...

Now, before the shitstorm, I understand that a baby will develop while a person in a vegetative state won't, and I understand why it's a weak analogy, but it's the only analogy that passed through this massive headache I have at the moment.

I wasn't saying you were jumping down my throat already. I meant before anyone jumps down my throat for what I was about to say (getting an abortion is selfish) that it is my opinion only. I was only replying to you because we were the ones having the convo. :P

You could say that the fetus has no complexity of thought or memory because it is your opinion. I believe they do have the complexity of thought & memory because of my religion (but let's not get into that :P). I'm just trying to state my opinons (without including my religious beliefs) on what could make the abortion rate decrease & what other options are out there. Because I can assume most people would want our abortion rate to decrease despite being pro-life or pro-abortion.

I agree that I want the abortion rate to go down because I want the pregnancy rate to go down, especially teenage pregnancy. I live in the state with the highest rate of teen pregnancy. I think that young girls purposefully get pregnant some times to hold on to their boyfriends (you even see that sort of stuff on silly TV talk shows), and then when the boy leaves anyway, the girl is stuck with a baby or two. Obviously most people do not end up with their high school sweetheart. It's rare that relationships that begin at 16 will still be going on when the people are 40. That's why the divorce rate for young people is so high as well.

When I graduated high school, there was a girl who was pregnant with her 4th child graduating with me. That is absurd. Birth control should be free, but young girls should also have more self confidence and self worth to know that they are loved and do not need a baby to feel loved unconditionally and that they do not need a baby to keep their man around. Oddly, though, I am 30 and never been pregnant (because I had cervical cancer), but people here are ASTOUNDED that I made it this far in life without either getting married or pregnant. Add to that, I have a college degree, a job, and my own home, and they practically faint!! It is unheard of in the South.

People should be educated about birth control. Parents should want their children to get birth control. Catholics should let go of that deep seeded disbelief of birth control. Schools should hand condoms out. Girls need to get the shot or the pill. Even using the "morning after" pill is a "form" of abortion, but it's not "technically" an abortion as performed by a doctor. But it is ending a pregnancy if one has already begun, which is sort of the same thing.

I believe that a few minutes after conception, the "baby" (which isn't even a fetus at that point and is barely as large as a period at the end of a sentence) cannot "feel" what would be done to it. I don't think late term abortions are morally or ethically right at all, and partial-birth abortions are disgusting.

I agree with everything you have said here except for the fact that taking the morning after pill is an abortion. I mean you don't even know if you are pregnant by then, & secondly it does not terminate an existing pregnancy it simply makes it LESS LIKELY for you to get pregnant. Believe me, I researched this a lot before taking it. It does slighty increase the chance of having an ectopic pregnancy, but there are a lot of birth control that does the same thing (IUD & Depo shot).

Actually, what I said was that it was "like" abortion. And it IS like abortion if fertilization has already taken place.

From the site http://www.morningafterpill.org/how-does-it-work.html

The emergency contraceptive/morning-after pill has three modes of action (as does the regular birth control pill); that is, it can work in one of three ways:

1. The normal menstrual cycle is altered, delaying ovulation; or
2. Ovulation is inhibited, meaning the egg will not be released from the ovary;
3. It can irritate the lining of the uterus (endometrium) so as to inhibit implantation.

Keep in mind that fertilization (the union of female ovum, or egg, and male sperm) occurs in the fallopian tube and that fertilization marks the beginning of a new human life - and the beginning of the pregnancy. The newly created child then travels down the fallopian tube to the uterus (womb) where he or she implants. Implantation is necessary for the new child to receive nourishment from the mother and continue developing. The journey from the fallopian tube to the womb takes between five and seven days during which pregnancy cannot be readily detected.

Therefore, if a woman ingests emergency contraception after fertilization has taken place, the third mode of action can occur. The lining of the uterus can be altered causing the woman's body to reject the living human embryo, making implantation impossible and the child will die. This result is called a chemical abortion; therefore emergency contraception is an abortifacient.

So, the only real "emergency" in all of this is the woman's fear of being pregnant.

I think you make a good point, I feel being pro-life but then 'allowing' the morning after pill is extremely hypocritical. How can someone be pro-life then say, "here you go, flush it all out with two little tablets". Someone might as well say, I'm anti-contraception, but I'm all for condoms.

Lol how true.

What you are speaking of is ectopic pregnancy. Yes, it is possible that a fertilized egg cannot attach to the uterine wall after being fertilized but this is a really slight chance because you have to take the pill within 72 hours. Preferbly right after & it can take up to 5 DAYS before the sperm actually fertilizes the egg.

So it goes without saying that if you belief emergency contraception is a form of abortion than you are saying that a woman having an IUD in place, having the depo shot, or other oral birth control that can have the same EFFECTS as the morning after pill are all having abortions.

You can't say something is "like" an abortion. It is or it is not. And in this case you are suggesting that because birth control has a slight chance of causing an ectopic pregnancy than it is abortion. Which is ludacris.

Do you know what the Plan B pill is? It is a high dosage of levonorgestrel which is the same hormone used in regular oral birth control pills.

Yes, it can take five days, but it can also take as little was half an hour for an ovum to be fertilised.

But that is very rare. What I want someone to explain is if you believe taking the morning after pill is abortion. Do you believe that taking other birth control that has the same risks as the morning after pill is abortion as well?

Honestly, I believe that any termination of a fertilized egg is an abortion. But there is a sort of "spectrum" of abortion because there are 9 months in a pregnancy. Ending a pregnancy that is only a couple of hours old, or a couple of days, is NOT the same thing as ending a pregnancy that is 8.5 months old...and it shouldn't be viewed as 'exactly' the same, but of course it is still ending a pregnancy. Preventing the egg from being fertilized in the first place is not exactly the same as killing an egg that is already fertilized. There are some people out there who do in fact believe that life begins at conception and they will argue that point with you.

Chemical abortion tablets for use in pregnancies which are up to 8 weeks along is simply a higher dose of the morning after pill. The contraceptive pill, rod and implant are different to this, they create conditions where an egg is not released and cannot mature within the ovum, amongst other effects. The IUD however does cause fertilised eggs to be aborted, which is why it can be used as emergency contraception and why pro-lifers mainly will not use an IUD.
The average time for an egg to be fertilised is 12 hours, in the medical community it a medication can be used after the minimum time taken for fertilisation to take place then they are considered abortifacient.

I didn't write that - it came from the Morning After Pill's website directly, and it said point blank that it is a chemical abortion. Did I come up with that out of thin air? No. I did not.

I am pro-choice anyway, so people having abortions is not a crime in my opinion. I think that everyone makes that decision for themselves. I don't think that everyone should run around doing it, but then again, I think that it's up to them what they do. It's not my life and it wouldn't be my kid, nor my body getting pregnant, etc, so I'm not all up in arms about people having abortions.

Partial birth abortions (or people leaving newborns in trashcans) is completely different, but that's not the point here anyway.