The problem with criticizing Tiny Furniture is that, ostensibly, it’s a good movie. The pacing, plot and characters are all perfectly acceptable in the larger scheme of the subtle narrative arc it employs. The final scene between Aura, the main character, and her mother, Siri, is one of the…
THIS IS MY UNCLE
I posted this long letter to the Komen Race for the Cure, and urged people to contact Komen. I wanted to ensure that you saw the letter, because I feel so strongly (and not just because I spent so much time writing it). Thanks.
Paul
The Board of Directors
Susan G. Komen for the Cure
5005 LBJ Freeway, Suite 250
Dallas, TX 75244
Dear Board Members:
Five mothers in my daughter’s grade school class developed breast cancer over a period of no more than three years. It took the life of one of these women, a dear friend, leaving two of my children’s friends motherless. (By the way, my daughter’s class had approximately 40 students. How do you like those odds?) This community tragedy is one of the reasons I was eager to seek and accept the position of Director of Communications of a major cancer program at one of top research cancer research universities in the nation. (I left this position several years ago, and these views represent only my personal opinions.) As you can imagine, I feel strongly about the need to find a cure for breast cancer and am very saddened by the politicization of this effort as evident in your decision to reduce support to Planned Parented so dramatically and in such a ham-handed manner.
I have always respected Komen and its work on behalf of cancer research. However, I find the decision in regards to Planned Parenthood appalling. I listened to CEO and Founder Nancy Brinker’s justification in the hopes of a reasonable explanation for this action, but it did not provide a rationale that I found credible or acceptable. Moreover, I found the emphasis on blaming the critics to be gratuitous and unbecoming of a respected organization. Brinker also seems to imply (this “shift will affect any number of organizations”) that Planned Parenthood is only one of many organizations suffering the same fate. I find this to be misleading and shameful, since Komen’s action will affect, at least at this point, only Planned Parenthood. The history surrounding its relationship with Planned Parenthood provides damning evidence that Komen designed it new strategy to mollify the far right by targeting Planned Parenthood. (I pity the organizations that will lose their funding to justify Ambassador Brinker’s statements.)
I am appalled for three reasons. First, I believe that denying future grants to Planned Parenthood for not meeting your “stringent” standards seems to me to be a fig leaf. Since Ambassador Brinker does not name the organization to which she refers and what high standards it failed to meet, I can only assume it is because of the dubious investigation of Planned Parenthood launched by Representative Cliff Stearns of Florida. Does this mean that a majority of a single Senate and/or House committee can launch a frivolous investigation of an organization to ensure that Komen and other groups will cancel their support? Does this not set a precedent? Has Komen’s leadership lost its sense of fairness and due process? Has it considered the possibility that some future congressional committee might initiate an investigation of Komen to exact its own pound of flesh?
Second, I believe Ambassador Brinker’s use of the word “scurrilous” to slander the critics more aptly describes the decision to hire Karen Handle as senior vice president for public policy. This choice is extraordinarily shortsighted for a philanthropy that is dependent on contributions from people across the political spectrum. Who thought it was wise to place such a highly partisan, controversial, and extreme politician in such an influential position? (Brinker’s assertion That Handle had no involvement in this decision is ludicrous. Why would any organization make such a major policy decision and not obtain the views of your policy EVP?) Since Handle has often voiced vitriolic opposition to stem cell research, I imagine her powerful new role and this “new strategic direction” has raised the anxiety levels at the nation’s major cancer research institutes, particularly among scientists who recognize the great potential of stem cell research. Under its new policy, will Komen eliminate grants to institutions that permit stem cell research?
The third reason I am upset about the decision is the apparent incompetence of your communications staff. Did your public relations advisers not realize the horrible impact this would have on your reputation and your contributions? Of course, I do not mean to imply that public relations should be a factor in the making principled, ethical decisions, but I remain unconvinced that the action that has raised so much furor rises to that level. Since I, as well as many of my profession’s practitioners, have held our Komen colleagues in high regard, their bungling is astonishing.
Your decision has created the public perception of a spineless organization willing to kick a sister ally when it is down. Planned Parenthood has provided invaluable services to women for more than 90 years (three times the 30 years of which Ambassador Brinker boasts.) Some of these services, of course, have been controversial and have made the organization a target for opponents of birth control and abortion. Whether Komen or I support these activists is irrelevant to the question at hand. Breast cancer strikes women and, yes, men who are on both sides of this issue. What are relevant are the drivers behind the investigation upon which you have based your determination to abandon Planned Parenthood and the women who depend on its services. As you know, the actual motive behind this inquiry is not the suspicion of improprieties but hostility to Planned Parenthood and some of its services. Do you not think that the supporters of this pillaring of Planned Parenthood would not be outraged with Komen if it chose to withdraw support from a non-profit organization advocating abstinence-only education, because some liberal politicians initiated an investigation of its practices based on unproven allegations?
Your decision is very disappointing, and, despite the protestation of Ambassador Brinker, appears remarkably political. I am very concerned about how Komen plans to distribute its future funding and the likelihood that extreme political views will influence whom its supports. To paraphrase your new senior vice president’s comments about a political opponent, “It’s frankly time to put the big boy [/girl] pants on because, candidly, if you can’t handle” [extremists], how are you going to handle” breast cancer?
In sorrow,
Paul J. Butera, PhD
