Family Planning Programs Are Not Always What They Seem

Katarina Carranco

Family Planning Programs Are Not Always What They Seem (

Four months ago, the world was stunned by the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The decision overturned Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 ruling that had effectively legalized the horrific procedure of abortion throughout the land. The Dobbs decision now makes it possible to save thousands of lives – lives of babies and mothers alike – as efforts on the state and local level gain momentum to put it into practice.

Already, numerous States are crafting legislation to make it more difficult to get an abortion, or even to outlaw the procedure altogether. And while at least 66 clinics across 15 states have closed down or stopped offering abortions, not everyone is happy.

That’s right – today the sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) “activists” are not happy, and they’re working 24/7 to engineer ways to bypass these new “restrictions.” In fact, the same activists are working worldwide to prevent any influence that Dobbs might have in Europe and beyond.

Previous chapters in the elites’ worldwide effort to eliminate the “excess population” have always begun with efforts to increase access to contraception and abortion. These efforts always bear the same shopworn banner of “women’s rights,” “women’s health” and “climate activism.”

Close up of a girl hands buying contraceptive pills and pharmacist explaining in a pharmacy

Money certainly talks, and it is no secret that money plays a central role in attempts to eliminate the “overflow” population as well – one innocent life at a time. Not surprisingly funding is a primary component in their next strategy, too.

And what is that, you may ask?

Meet The Killer Calculator

Introducing the next chapter in the population control agenda: the Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator. This project, or, better yet, this tool, has been created by the Guttmacher Institute, and it is designed to have a powerful impact worldwide.

According to Dr. Herminia Palacio, President and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, this interactive, web-based tool “will provide stakeholders with evidence-based estimates of the health benefits they can expect from investments in family planning services.”

The Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator produces data and graphs presenting the following information:

  • The number of women and couples who would receive modern contraceptive care
  • The number of unintended pregnancies, unplanned births, and unsafe abortions averted by increased contraceptive use
  • The number of women’s and girls’ lives that would be saved
  • Cost savings that would be achieved

“Investment Calculator”? That’s right. It all boils down to dollars and cents. Capitalizing on the self-indulgent culture spawned by the sexual revolution sixty years ago, The Guttmacher Institute is pandering to “instant gratification” when it comes to sex – and selling it as “transparency.”

Here’s how it works: when prospective stakeholders (another euphemism; that means “donors”) can directly and transparently see the impact that their donation will produce based on the program’s calculations, they are more likely to donate. The success of the Guttmacher “calculator” rests on the assumption that donations from stakeholders will cover the full cost of contraceptive care—both service delivery costs, and associated programs and systems costs.

The main goal of this “tool” is clear. It is designed to generate worldwide funding for international access to contraceptives because such funding is indispensable to the effort to control the sexual and reproductive health for women and girls by medicinally sterilizing them.

Realizing that they face increasing opposition in their battle to provide legal abortions, the SRHR activists have realized that contraception is their primary weapon in their campaign to “empower” women and girls.

And here’s more news! Grasping at any available pretext, SRHR activists have now claimed that contraception is a fundamental solution to fighting climate change as well.

“Fewer Babies Means Better Weather – May Start Trend!”

“Funding sexual and reproductive health care is not only the right and sensible thing to do for the health of women and girls—it’s also a smart investment that leads to significant savings in the long run,” Palacio said.

“Savings” only for the survivors, of course. “There’s just enough of me, but waaaay too many of you,” as P.J. O’Rourke once put it.

P.J. was a satirist, but, for the Guttmacher Institute, the campaign for fewer humans is grim.

Indeed, the notion goes hand in hand with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These goals include Family Planning as a critical component of the SDG agenda, which promises to “end poverty, hunger, AIDS, and discrimination against women and girls.”

In commenting about the tool, Rachel Murro, Senior Research Assistant for the Guttmacher Institute, says “[it] is an important resource to equip advocates, policymakers, and donors with a strong business case for investing in these essential services.”

We should not confuse this idea of “family planning” with any desire to protect and prosper families and children. For the Guttmacher Institute, its Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator is designed for “stakeholders” – that is, donors. It’s a business, and it’s about finance, not families.

That’s right. Financiers, including governments as well as businesses, can use the calculator to see how much their investments will aid in “health benefits” in the countries or regions of their choice. The Guttmacher Institute makes no effort to hide what they mean by “health benefits.” These “benefits” essentially come down to increased use of contraceptives and fewer babies.

So the phrase “family planning” is but a euphemism for “contraception,” which even the notorious secular Internet resource Wikipedia makes clear.

Abortion activists always complain that there are not enough abortions per year to meet “full equity” in each country per year, so they have to sell their contraception campaign as the next best tool to “invest in family planning.” This moves them closer to the cynical and destructive national “development goals” as described by global organizations such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization.

Do not let warm words like “family planning” lead you to believe otherwise, because “family planning” programs are not always what they seem.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.