The list of charitable research organizations and their corresponding positions on the life issues posted to our website is neither all pro-life nor all anti-life; it is mixed. Unfortunately, most of the charity organizations on our list are marked with the red minus sign. It is simply just a sad fact that most national medical research / advocacy groups support some form of unethical research. There is no listing, to our knowledge, of only pro-life research organizations.
A green positive / plus sign indicates that ALL considers the organization worthy of support from pro-lifers. ALL considers an organization to be pro-life if it is opposed to abortion, human embryonic stem cell and / or aborted fetal body parts research, all forms of cloning and other attacks against the human person at any stage of development as well as Planned Parenthood Federation and other pro-abortion organizations.
A red negative / minus sign indicates that ALL does not consider the organization worthy of support from pro-lifers. If the organization supports, in any way (theory, advocacy, lobbying, granting and/or research) any offenses to life, it is not considered pro-life. Further, if any organization refuses to answer our inquires, refuses to be clear about its position and/or attempts to couch its answer in terms of referring to another agency (i.e., federal government branches), it is not considered pro-life.
A plain yellow circle indicates that ALL urges caution when considering support for the organization due to a change in a prior rating. That is, an organization may have previously received a green positive or a red negative because of certain policy positions which are now questionable or cannot be verified.
The rating is based on the organization’s response to written correspondence (regular postal or e-mail), a review of the organization’s website, verifiable news reports, verifiable correspondence forwarded to us by others and/or a combination of any of these.
Research into other organizations not listed is an on-going process, but may be limited by staff and resources at ALL. If you have information (and documentation) about organizations that you would like to see listed, we would be most happy to receive it. Currently, we are not in a position to print the list (it amounts to more than 100 pages, not including documentation in hyperlinks) however, feel free to pass the link to the website to everyone you know!
ALS Association (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Association)
1275 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
Updated 2018: Confirmed
In an email to ALL from Carrie Munk at the ALS Association July 2, 2014:
The ALS Association primarily funds adult stem cell research. Currently, The Association is funding one study using embryonic stem cells (ESC), and the stem cell line was established many years ago under ethical guidelines set by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS); this research is funded by one specific donor, who is committed to this area of research. In fact, donors may stipulate that their funds not be invested in this study or any stem cell project. Under very strict guidelines, The Association may fund embryonic stem cell research in the future.
The ALS Association also financially supports NEALS (the Northeast ALS Consortium) which performs human embryonic stem cell research:
The ALS Association Awards $500,000 to the NEALS Consortium for Its TREAT ALS™ Clinical Trials Network
For the sixth consecutive year, The ALS Association is pleased to announce its support of the Northeast ALS Consortium (NEALS), the largest consortium of ALS clinical researchers in the world. This year’s award totals $500,000 and will fund new initiatives and ongoing programs that will increase the quality and efficiency of clinical trials for ALS. (www.alsa.org/news/archive/neals-consortium-award.html)
Alex's Lemonade Stand Foundation
333 E. Lancaster Ave
Wynnewood, PA 19096
Updated 2018: ALSF grant guidelines now state that it “does not accept proposals for research utilizing human embryonic stem cells or nonhuman primates. (Research with human induced pluripotent stem cells is permissible.)” Source
Liz Scott, Alex’s mother and co-executive director of Alex’s Lemonade Stand Foundation, stated in an e-mail to ALL in May, 2012, that: “Alex’s Lemonade Stand Foundation has not funded anything even remotely related to embryonic stem cell research.”
However, when it was pointed out to Mrs. Scott that, according to the Foundation’s website, there were grant funds being directed toward researchers and research facilities that support, promote and conduct such research, she responded:
“Although we have not issued a public policy position, I can tell you that ALSF has always followed all federal guidelines for research that involves human-derived cells and tissues. We are very sensitive to the variety of opinions on issues related to stem cells, and are committed to funding research programs that meet all of the stringent ethical standards at the institutional, foundation and government levels, that are designed to find cures for childhood cancer. I can tell you that when we award funds to our grant recipients 100% of the funds are used for their project only—the institution is not allowed to take any indirect costs or general operating costs from the award funds or to use funds for other projects.”
ALL cautions that federal guidelines allow for both human embryonic stem cell research and the use of aborted fetal materials in research.
When contacted by email in July 2014 with an update request, someone by the name of Lisa responded:
“We do not have a policy. We have never received an application that includes embryonic stem cells so this isn’t an issue for us.”
When asked what the organization would do if it did receive a grant application that involved the use of human embryonic stem cells or aborted fetal material, there was no further reply.
Alliance for Aging Research
1700 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Updated 2018: Confirmed
The Alliance for Aging Research is a 501(c)(3) group that advocates for medical research and scientific discoveries to improve the health and independence of Americans as they age. As such, the Alliance supports public policies that advance research involving both adult and embryonic stem cells and regenerative medicine in general.
While the Alliance for Aging Research opposes efforts to copy human life through cloning technologies, it is a leader among patient groups and science advocates supporting public funding for broad activities in stem cell research as well as therapeutic cloning of compatible stem cell lines for research and potential therapies. On its own and through membership in the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research, the Alliance will support the enactment of legislation to encourage increased federal funding for advances in stem cell research.
UPDATE: July 2, 2014
In an email to ALL from Noel Lloyd, Communications Manager at AAR:
The Alliance supports public policies that advance medical research with the potential to prevent, postpone or otherwise lessen diseases and disabilities that increase with aging. This includes policy support – though not direct funding – of a broad scope of regenerative medicine, including research on induced pluripotent and human embryonic stem cells.
Alliance for Regenerative Medicine
525 2nd Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20002
Updated 2018: Confirmed
“The Alliance for Regenerative Medicine (ARM)’s mission is to advance regenerative medicine by representing, supporting and engaging all stakeholders in the field, including companies, academic research institutions, patient advocacy groups, foundations, health insurers, financial institutions and other organizations.”
According to the website, regenerative medicine includes cell-based therapies, gene therapy, biologics, tissue engineering, bio-banking, and stem cells for drug discovery, toxicity testing and disease modeling. It is this last branch of regenerative medicine which causes the most concern: “Companies are increasingly learning to leverage the use of stem cells and/or living tissue constructs to create in vitro models to study human mechanisms of disease and the effects of drugs on a variety of cell and tissue types such as human heart, liver and brain cells. These models, built predominantly using embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells, allow for faster and safer drug development.”
Many of ARM’s members are companies, foundations, and associations with public positions of support for human embryonic stem cell research.
225 N. Michigan Avenue
Chicago, IL 60601-7633
Updated 2018: Confirmed
“The Alzheimer’s Association policy supports and encourages any legitimate scientific avenue that offers the potential to advance this goal, including human embryonic stem cell research; and, we oppose any restriction or limitation on research, provided that appropriate scientific review, and ethical and oversight guidelines and compliance are in place.”
The American Cancer Society is not considered a pro-life organization for the following reasons:
Support for human embryonic stem cell research
- Grant funding at facilities known prominently for human embryonic stem cell research
- Grant funding to Planned Parenthood
- Referrals to Planned Parenthood as a health information/education resource
- Suggested fertility options including IVF, embryo freezing, egg/sperm donation and surrogacy
The American Cancer Society (ACS) has, for many years, insisted that the federal government “remains the institution best suited to both fund and oversee research using human embryonic stem cells” while claiming to fund only “explorations into uses of human adult stem cells and stem cells from umbilical cord blood.”
However, in August 2001, when then-President Bush signed an executive order restricting federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research to stem cell lines that were already in existence at the time, the ACS issued a statement commending the administration for allowing stem cell research to proceed, and expressed hope for its future.
“The Society believes that such research holds extraordinary potential in the fight against a variety of life-threatening diseases currently afflicting an estimated 140 million Americans,” the statement said. It continued, “The American Cancer Society commends the Administration for allowing this vital scientific research to proceed—even in a limited way.”
“The American Cancer Society remains hopeful that both the government and commercial sectors will continue to work collaboratively and with an open mind to explore additional solutions that will allow for the continuation of human embryonic stem cell research as necessary and appropriate,” the ACS statement concluded.
These statements can no longer be found on the ACS website, but can be viewed HERE.
Keep in mind that during the eight years that followed Bush’s order, Congress passed legislation to expand human embryonic stem cell research and each time it was vetoed. When President Barack Obama took office in 2009, one of his first acts as president was to issue an executive order expanding the research policy. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) began funding grants in the field of human embryonic stem cell research.
No ACS grants which provide for the direct funding of human embryonic stem cell research have been identified; however, grant funding to facilities and labs where such research abounds is indeed prominent.
The American Cancer Society has, in the past, also awarded financial grants to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading provider of abortion.
Despite the outcry over the connection to Planned Parenthood, the ACS maintains the association. Visitors to the ACS website can type Planned Parenthood into the search field and find a number of results:
Referral to Planned Parenthood as an ‘additional resource’ and a ‘local resource.’
Until mid-2016 it referred to Planned Parenthood as source of information and support for testicular cancer.
Referral to Planned Parenthood as source of information and support for cervical cancer.
Until late 2016 the ACS referred to Planned Parenthood as a Voluntary Health Organization which should be invited into schools.
The ACS notes that use of IUDs correlate with decreased risk of cervical cancer and that multiple pregnancies correlate to increased risk. The ACS recommends the HPV vaccine (Gardasil or Ceravax). Until 2016 the ACS also listed Planned Parenthood Federation of America as a source of information and support concerning HPV.
Kris Kim, ACS’ Executive Vice President for the Northeast Region was the associate vice president for communications at Planned Parenthood New York City.
Lastly, in its document on fertility in women with cancer, the ACS suggests egg freezing, embryo freezing, in vitro fertilization, egg donation, and surrogacy.
And, in its document on fertility in men with cancer, the ACS suggests sperm banking, sperm donation and in vitro fertilization.
American Council on Science and Health
New York, NY 10023-5860
Updated 2018: Confirmed
The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) is a consumer education consortium concerned with issues related to food, nutrition, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, lifestyle, the environment, and health. ACSH was founded in 1978 by a group of scientists who had become concerned that many important public policies related to health and the environment did not have a sound scientific basis. These scientists created the organization to add reason and balance to debates about public health issues and to bring common sense views to the public.
“I’m pleased with the court’s [U.S. appeals court rules in favor of stem cell research, August 2012] decision,” says ACSH’s Dr. Gilbert Ross, “since stem cells have such vast potential to solve currently insoluble medical problems, including illnesses such as ALS and perhaps, eventually, Alzheimer’s disease. Certainly, to continue scientific advances in this field, research on stem cells must not be discouraged.”
ACSH has been a fervent advocate for supporting research progress in ESCs (embryonic stem cells) for years, despite the controversy involving the objections of some to using human embryonic tissues in research.
American Heart Association
National Service Center
7272 Greenville Ave
Dallas, TX 75231
Updated 2018: Confirmed
The American Heart Association website states the following:
“Research applications involving the creation of human embryos or the derivation or use of human stem cells from in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment embryos or fetal sources will not be accepted.”
American Lung Association
55 Wacker Dr., Suite 1150
Chicago, IL 60601
Updated 2018: Confirmed
The American Lung Association recognizes that research with human stem cells offer significant potential to further our understanding of fundamental lung biology and to develop cell-based therapies to treat lung disease. The American Lung Association supports the responsible pursuit of research involving the use of human stem cells.
American Medical Association
330 N. Wabash Ave., Suite 39300
Chicago, IL 60611-5885
“The principles of medical ethics of the AMA do not prohibit a physician from performing an abortion in accordance with good medical practice and under circumstances that do not violate the law.”
The AMA supports the legal availability of mifepristone (RU-486) for appropriate research and, if indicated, clinical practice. (Res. 100, A-90; Amended: Res. 507, A-99)
The AMA reaffirms its position in support of the use of fetal tissue obtained from induced abortion for scientific research. (Res. 540, A-92; Reaffirmed: CSA Rep. 8, A-03)
Our AMA (1) supports continued research employing fetal tissue obtained from induced abortion, including investigation of therapeutic transplantation; and (2) demands that adequate safeguards be taken to isolate decisions regarding abortion from subsequent use of fetal tissue, including the anonymity of the donor, free and non-coerced donation of tissue, and the absence of financial inducement. (Res. 170, I-89; Reaffirmed by Res. 91, A-90; Modified: Sunset Report, I-00)
American Parkinson's Disease Association
135 Parkinson Avenue
Staten Island, NY 10305
“We were very pleased on September 28, 2010 that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay of the preliminary injunction pending its review of the appeal of the judicial challenge to federal funding for human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research. Without getting mired down in all the various terms and courts, what this means is that federal funding for hESC research will continue at least for the time period that it takes for the Court of Appeals to review Judge Lamberth’s August 23rd decision to enjoin funding. You should also know that yesterday the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR), of which PAN is a founding member, filed an amicus brief in the District Court. This brief supports and compliments the Department of Justice (DoJ) brief that was filed on behalf of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on Monday.”
[Department of Veteran Affairs and APDA Winter 2011 Parkinson Press Newsletter]
American Red Cross
2025 E. Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
A report issued from the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in December of 2011 caused concerns that the organization may start advocating for abortion rights.
In a section of the report on human rights, IFRC quotes a widely criticized document issued by Anand Grover, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, which said,
“States must take measures to ensure that legal and safe abortion services are available, accessible, and of good quality.” The IFRC report goes on to editorialize, “But the real challenge is to find out how many states will indeed change their policies accordingly.”
This may lead some to believe IFRC could eventually declare abortion a human right as Amnesty International did in 2007. Amid much controversy, Amnesty International simply announced that endorsing abortion as a right was a “natural” outgrowth of its 2-year campaign countering violence against women.
There have been no further developments in this area.
The American Red Cross has no formal public policy statements that we could find on life issues. It should be noted, however, that the American Red Cross has been under intense scrutiny and has been sued repeatedly by federal regulators to force improvements in blood safety.
The American Red Cross also has a Diversity Program which officially recognizes and encourages participation in Gay and Lesbian Pride Month.
“American Red Cross Fires Employee for Refusal to Celebrate ‘Gay and Lesbian Pride Month,’” LifeSiteNews, August 5, 2005
American Spinal Injury Association
2020 Peachtree Road, NW
Atlanta, GA 30309
ASIA is a multidisciplinary organization whose membership is composed of physicians and allied health professionals specifically involved in spinal cord injury management. Current membership numbers 452 of which 85% are physicians. The remaining 15% are nurses, therapists, psychologists and other allied health professionals.
ASIA positions on the life topics are not clear; ALL is awaiting a response to our inquiry.
American Thoracic Society
New York, NY 10004
The American Thoracic Society (ATS) is an organization dedicated to serving patients with lung disease through research, advocacy, training, and patient care. As such, it supports making federal funding available for research using human embryonic stem cells with appropriate guidelines and federal and institutional oversight.
. . . [adult stem cell research] approaches should neither distract from nor preempt research for which the goal is to assess the use of pluripotent embryonic stem cells for the treatment of lung diseases.
Amnesty International defends access to abortion for women at risk
In April 2007, Amnesty International changed its neutral stance on abortion to supporting access to abortion in cases of rape and incest, and when the life or the health of the mother might be threatened. Amnesty’s official policy is that they “do not promote abortion as a universal right” but “support the decriminalisation of abortion”.
Amnesty International Continues Pushing Abortion Worldwide (2013)
Amnesty International, a human rights organization that used to be abortion neutral, is now using the problem of maternal mortality to advocate for abortion. In a new report, ostensibly on medical care for maternal health, Amnesty calls on governments to repeal abortion laws and conscience protection for medical workers who may object. They also call for public health systems to train and equip health care providers to perform abortions.
Amnesty’s “Maternal Health is a Human Right” campaign focuses attention on four countries: Sierra Leone, Burkina Faso, Peru, and the United States. Amnesty argues that maternal mortality will decrease if it is treated as a human rights issue, if costs to health care are covered by governments, and if a right for women to control their reproductive and sex lives is established.
Amnesty International Launches New Campaign to Push Abortion Worldwide (2014)
Amnesty International has been under fire for years for its pro-abortion positions and now the venerable human rights group is launching a new global effort to push abortion on a worldwide scale. “The My Body My Rights campaign encourages young people around the world to know and demand their right to make decisions about their health, body, sexuality and reproduction without state control, fear, coercion or discrimination. It also seeks to remind world leaders of their obligations to take positive action, including through access to health services,” the group says.
“Amnesty International believes that everyone should be free to make decisions about if, when and with whom they have sex, whether or when they marry or have children and how to best protect themselves from sexual ill-health and HIV.”
The Avon Foundation for Women is a 501(c)(3) public charity founded in 1955 with the mission to promote or aid charitable, scientific, educational, and humanitarian activities, with a special emphasis on those activities that improve the lives of women and their families. In its work to realize those aspirations, the Foundation’s current mission focus is to lead efforts to eradicate breast cancer and end domestic and gender violence.
The Avon Breast Cancer Crusade was established in 1992. Since then, more than $815 million has been raised for breast cancer awareness and education, screening and diagnosis, access to care, support services and scientific research. Beneficiaries range from leading cancer research centers to local, nonprofit breast health programs, creating a powerful international network of research, medical, social service, and community-based breast cancer organizations.
The Avon Foundation is one of many breast cancer research fundraising groups that has yet to acknowledge the link between abortion and breast cancer.
While the Avon Foundation does not direct grant funding to Planned Parenthood, the more detailed answer on its website seems to indicate that it might—if it received a grant request that met its criteria.
Q: Does the Avon Foundation for Women support Planned Parenthood?
Our records indicate that in the last five years the Avon Foundation has received only one Planned Parenthood affiliate grant application from among more than an estimated 3,000 grant applications received during that time period, and it was not among our funded applicants. Our grant programs are highly competitive and unfortunately we receive many more quality applicants than available funds can support. Our Safety Net Program, Avon Breast Health Outreach Program and eight Avon Breast Health Centers of Excellence provide more than $15 million annually to address the needs for education, screening and treatment programs for underserved and uninsured women.
The Speak Out Against Domestic Violence program was launched in the U.S. in 2004 and global expansion began shortly thereafter, with programs now in Central and South America and Europe. The Speak Out mission focuses on raising funds and awareness for domestic violence awareness, education and prevention programs while developing new community outreach and support for victims, and there is a special focus on supporting programs that assist children affected by domestic violence. Already more than $38 million has been awarded to over 250 organizations in the U.S.
In 2008, Avon Products, Inc. and the Avon Foundation introduced the company’s first-ever global fundraising product, the Women’s Empowerment Bracelet, designed to save and improve women’s lives worldwide. The bracelet was unveiled by Avon Foundation Honorary Chair Reese Witherspoon at the second annual Global Summit for a Better Tomorrow, presented by the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) in partnership with Avon, at the United Nations in celebration of International Women’s Day. Since then an entire catalog of fundraising products has been created.
UNIFEM is the United Nations Development Fund for Women. Established in 1976, it is self-described as “fostering women’s empowerment and gender equality” and helping to make the “voices of women heard at the United Nations.” Two international agreements form the framework for UNIFEM’s mission and goals: The Beijing Platform for Action and the Convention on the Elimination for All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
In 1995, the Beijing Platform for Action (Beijing Platform) expressly called upon governments to reexamine restrictive abortion laws that punish women. By linking women’s health to abortion law reform, the Beijing Platform affirmed what [pro-abortion] advocates [believe] worldwide: removing legal barriers to abortion saves women’s lives, promotes their health, and empowers women to make decisions crucial to their well-being.
The Beijing mandate also reflects a global trend toward abortion law liberalization—a trend that first gained momentum in the late 1960s and continues to this day.
CEDAW, created in 1979, is actually a global Equal Rights Amendment. CEDAW mandates gender re-education, access to abortion services, homosexual and lesbian rights, and the legalization of “voluntary” prostitution as a valid form of professional employment.
See also http://www.all.org/newsroom_judieblog.php?id=2043.
Children's Defense Fund
Export, PA 15632
We believe that both Marian Wright Edelman and the Children’s Defense Fund stand in direct contradiction to everything the Catholic Church holds and teaches on major family life issues including fornication, contraception, abortion, and family life policies.
U.S. Coalition for Life
The name Children’s Defense Fund is obviously a misnomer. Established by Marian Wright Edelman in 1973 as an “agent of social change,” the CDF is in fact not a friend of children. This is one reason why the CDF receives the lion’s share of its operating funds for litigation, research, and “public education” from major anti-life foundations including the proverbial Ford, Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations—-long-time agents of “social(ist) change”—-and new corporate anti-life entities such as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which was instrumental in the establishment of so-called “school-based” clinics promoted by the CDF and its nation-wide affiliates. It also explains why two of the nation’s foremost abortion movers and shakers—-former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton and former Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala—-have had a long-term and intimate relationship with both Mrs. Edelman and the CDF.
Further details: http://www.all.org/article/index/id/MTQxMDc/
Children's Leukemia Research Association Inc.
585 Stewart Ave, Suite LL18
Garden City, NY 11530
“Our organization is split on this controversy [sic] issue. However, as a volunteer organization, we do not have any control over the works of our scholars. We are strictly a volunteer organization which raises funds for research with but one objective . . . to pray that science will indeed find the answers that we seek. We place no caveat on what a scholar can and cannot do. [We] hope you will appreciate our office remaining neutral.”
Allan D. Weinberg
Note: In other words, CLRA claims that it has no control over what type of research is conducted with the funds that the organization raises and provides to researchers.
No response to request for update.
Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR)
2021 K Street NW, Suite 305
Washington, DC 20006
CAMR, as an organization, was dissolved in 2010 and re-directed all of its assest as well as its website to the Alliance on Regenerative Medicine. See listing for ARM.
“The Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR) is the nation’s leading bipartisan pro-cures coalition. CAMR is comprised of nearly 100 nationally recognized patient organizations, universities, scientific societies, and foundations advocating for the advancement of breakthrough research and technologies in regenerative medicine.
CAMR’s advocacy and education outreach focuses on stem cell research, somatic cell nuclear transfer [cloning], and related research fields in which the mission is to develop treatments and cures for individuals with life-threatening illnesses and disorders.
320 Osprey Court
Wexford, PA 15090
“That type of research [human embryonic stem cell] is not applicable to any of the projects we have funded or are likely to fund in the near future. You can find a complete list of our projects on our website under the Research tab. As such, we have not taken a position and do not intend to take a position as it is outside the scope of our mission.”
Rick Labuda, Executive Director
E-mail to ALL on July 28, 2014
Crohn's & Colitis Foundation of America
733 Third Ave., Suite 510
New York, NY 10017
“. . . NO, . . . We currently do not fund any stem cell research. However, if we received a grant application for funding that had merit we would not automatically exclude it from funding consideration. We have some concerns regarding the risk vs. the benefits of stem cell transplants. At this point we have not received any stem cell funding request that we found suitable to fund. (italics and underline added)
Jackie Spencer, MSW
Manager, Educational Resources
Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation
email to ALL, April 8, 2014
Cystic Fybrosis Foundation
6931 Arlington Road, 2nd Floor
Bethesda, MD 20814
“The CF Foundation has not engaged in stem cell research, because it is not a viable treatment option for CF at this time. Since it is not viable for CF at this time, the CF Foundation does not take a stance on the issue either way. We are dedicated to finding a cure/control for this disease and our focus remains steadfast on that primary goal.” (italics added)
“The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation does not support embryonic stem cell research. While stem cells may be beneficial in developing treatment for certain diseases, for CF, other approaches such as the use of small molecules hold more immediate promise. To this point, the CF Foundation is funding many drug development collaborations with biotech and pharmaceutical companies to discover and develop new potential therapies to fight the disease from every angle.”
American Life Leauge has marked the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation with a caution symbol due to the fact that much of today’s drug development research involves the use of human embryonic stem cell lines.
The Sabrina Cohen Foundation (SCF) is a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to funding cutting edge research and innovative therapies that will improve the quality of life for individuals living with spinal cord injuries and other disabilities.
SCF funds scientists dedicated to advancing the field of Regenerative Medicine, primarily focused on conditions in the Central Nervous System. In 2009, SCF donated its first research grant of $25,000 to the University of California, Irvine, where studies of restoring mobility in paralyzed rats and research on spinal cord injuries yielded the world’s first-ever FDA approved embryonic stem cell treatment to be tested in humans.
The website for the International Office of the Salvation Army (http://www1.salvationarmy.org/IHQ/www_ihq_isjc.nsf/vw-sublinks/FE3C992C78838853802577DF0071D796?openDocument) states the following:
The Salvation Army believes all people are created in the image of God and therefore have unique and intrinsic value. Human life is sacred and all people should be treated with dignity and respect. The Salvation Army accepts the moment of fertilisation as the start of human life. We believe that society has a responsibility to care for others, and especially to protect and promote the welfare of vulnerable people, including unborn children.
The Salvation Army believes that life is a gift from God and we are answerable to God for the taking of life. As such, The Salvation Army is concerned about the growing ready acceptance of abortion, which reflects insufficient concern for vulnerable persons including the unborn. We do not believe that genetic abnormalities that are identified in an unborn child who is likely to live longer than a brief period after birth are sufficient to warrant a termination of pregnancy.
The Salvation Army recognizes tragic and perplexing circumstances that require difficult decisions regarding a pregnancy. Decisions should be made only after prayerful and thoughtful consideration, acknowledging the tremendous pressures that occur during an unexpected pregnancy. There is a responsibility on all involved to give the parents of the unborn child, particularly the woman, appropriate pastoral, medical and other counsel. The Salvation Army believes that termination can occur only when
- Carrying the pregnancy further seriously threatens the life of the mother; or
- Reliable diagnostic procedures have identified a foetal abnormality considered incompatible with survival for more than a very brief post natal period.
In addition, rape and incest are brutal acts of dominance violating women physically and emotionally. This situation represents a special case for the consideration of termination as the violation may be compounded by the continuation of the pregnancy.
NOTE FROM ALL: A reading of the Salvation Army’s position makes it clear that it does support abortion – in the cases of “life of the mother” and “fetal deformity” – as well as some cases of rape and incest. The Salvation Army also supports abortifacient birth control.
Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to providing scientific research, education and resources to encourage safe, moral, pro-life medicines and therapeutics.
The founding mission of Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI) is to:
- Conduct scientific studies to determine the public health consequences of utilizing aborted fetal material for biomedical purposes.
- Educate key opinion leaders about the pervasive use of fresh aborted fetal tissue and other unethical materials in biomedical research.
- Develop a certification stamp so that consumers can be assured that their vaccines, drugs, cosmetics, and foods and beverages do not contain aborted fetal material.
- Be a beacon to other scientists to reject the use of aborted fetal material so that they can align their commercial practices to religious truths.
A new generation of scientists and medical professionals is rising, full of strength and hope and founded on the respect of the human being from his/her beginning to natural death. In working on safe vaccines and effective stem cell therapy, the scientists and students at SCPI seek to provide the freedom to all Americans to choose moral treatment for themselves and for their children and in this way to participate in the culture of life in regards to disease treatment and prevention. Our cadre of dedicated professionals realize that the true promise of moral stem cell research must be advanced to help those with degenerative diseases, both now and for future generations.
Spina Bifida Association
1600 Wilson Blvd., Suite 800
Arlington, VA 22209
The Spina Bifida Association did not respond to ALL’s questionnaire but did inform our independent researcher that “the Spina Bifida Association has not adopted a policy statement on cloning, stem cells or fetal research.”
We did not locate anything on the SBA website that would contradict this statement.
The SBA Women’s Health Information Sheet includes the statement that, “Pregnancy is possible for almost all women with Spina Bifida so appropriate contraception is strongly recommended if pregnancy is not currently desired” and artificial forms are referred to. The information sheet also highly recommends the HPV vaccine.
St. Baldrick's Foundation
1333 Mayflower Ave, Ste 400
Monrovia, CA 91016
St. Baldrick’s Foundation funds cannot be used for human embryonic stem cell research. This is not a statement on whether or not we think it should be supported; the decision is based on the fact that many of our donors and volunteers – our source of funds – would not be comfortable supporting it. Stem cell transplantations not using human embryonic stem cells – using cord blood or matched donors – are often used in treating childhood cancer patients, and our funds may be used in this non-controversial area of research.
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
262 Danny Thomas Place
Memphis, TN 38105
The following information is lengthy, however it boils down to the fact that there are doctors/researchers on staff at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital who are either supportive of or involved in human embryonic stem cell research and SJCRH refuses to reply to ALL’s written correspondence concerning these staff.
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital has not publicly stated an unequivocal condemnation of anti-life research practices and ALL will continue to give this organization a negative rating on this website until it does.
UPDATE: January 2014
A review of the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital website indicates that the three doctors/researchers referred to in correspondence below are still on staff at the facility. It appears also that each continues to be involved in and/or supportive of human embryonic stem cell research, particularly Dr. S. McKinney-Freeman who co-authored additional scientifc research papers in 2013 with Dr. George Daley, who has been involved in iPS stem cell research.
No further correspondence has been received from SJCRH and no publicly stated unequivocal condemnation of human embryonic stem cell research has come from St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.
UPDATE: February 2013
ALL has, on more than one occasion, written to St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital via certified letter (which have been signed for) asking for clarification of its policy regarding human embryonic stem cell research. To date, there has been no response. SJCRH continues to employ staff who are supportive of, and in some cases involved with, such research and refuses to publicly condemn such research. Until St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital responds to our mailings and/or publicly professes its opposition to human embryonic stem cell research, both in practice and theory, this posting will continue to reflect a negative appraisal of their position.
UPDATE: January 2011
In response to information received from an ALL supporter, the following letter was sent to Judith Williams Black, Director of Public Relations with St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital:
November 17, 2010
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital
Attn: Judith Williams Black
Director, Public Relations
501 St. Jude Place
Memphis, TN 38105-1942
Dear Ms. Williams Black,
In an e-mail dated November 12, 2010 you notified a supporter of American Life League (ALL) that:
“… St. Jude does not currently do human embryonic stem cell research. There are, however, protocols that involve hematopoietic (blood) stem cell, which are used for bone marrow transplants. … “
However, in a job description for a post-doctoral position available in the Department of Hematology at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital with Dr. S. McKinney-Freeman, the candidate is to “investigate the molecular mechanisms regulating hematopoietic stem cell development from embryos and embryonic stem cells” (bold underline added).
We at American Life League would like to know exactly what the policy/position statement of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital is concerning human embryonic stem cell research.
Your prompt response to this inquiry is greatly appreciated.
Ms. Williams Black responded with a letter dated November 29, 2010 and wrote, in part, that the statement made in her e-mail to our supporter (that St. Jude is not currently conducting human embryonic stem cell research) “remains accurate.” Further, Ms. Williams Black pointed out that the job posting we referred to involved mouse embryos and use of mouse model systems. Ms. Williams Black concluded her letter by stating, “This should clarify our current involvement in embryonic stem cell research.”
ALL wrote to Ms. Williams Black again on December 9, 2010:
Dear Ms. Williams Black,
Thank you for your letter dated November 29, 2010 responding to our inquiries about Shannon McKinney-Freeman, Ph.D., and embryonic stem cell research.
Unfortunately, your letter did not fully clarify St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital’s position on human embryonic stem cell research.
SJCRH repeatedly and consistently states that it is not currently conducting human embryonic stem cell research, yet your department refuses to address the question of hospital staff who are known supporters of, and participants in, such research. Further, your response does not explain why SJCRH and its staff are conducting embryonic stem cell research on mouse models when this type of research is typically designed and pursued for applications to human beings.
Shannon McKinney-Freeman is a former member (2007) of the Public Education Committee of the International Society for Stem Cell Research. The ISSCR publicly supports human embryonic stem cell research.
The following is taken from “ISSCR Comments on NIH Draft Guidelines for Embryonic Stem Cell Funding” on May 22, 2009:
We welcome and applaud the leadership that the NIH proposes to assume for the oversight of human embryonic stem cell research in the United States. The draft guidelines represent an important step towards accelerating critical medical research by giving scientists access to more embryonic stem cell lines that better reflect the diversity in our society, make it possible to model inherited human diseases, and have favorable properties such as reduced contamination with animal products. Given the importance of human embryonic stem cell research to future medical progress, access to an increased range of lines will accelerate efforts to understand and treat major public health problems.
The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) has already endorsed research on pluripotent stem cell lines derived via in vitro fertilization (IVF), somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT),
parthenogenesis, or gene-based reprogramming. The ISSCR supports such stem cell research globally, where performed under rigorous standards of research ethics described in the 2006 ISSCR Guidelines for the Conduct of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. We reaffirm this position and encourage NIH to review its Guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research as the science in this area evolves. In the interest of improving world health we urge the NIH to open discussions on funding research carried out with human pluripotent stem cell lines derived from sources other than excess reproductive IVF embryos, including SCNT embryos, if they become available and are derived under rigorous ethical standards.
Dr. McKinney-Freeman has been involved in research utilizing human embryonic stem cells and cell lines and co-authored an article entitled, “Human Skin Cells Turned Into Stem Cells.” The collaborating authors include, Jason West, Susan Garfinkel, Ph.D., and Suzanne Kadereit, Ph.D. According to this article, “The current study directly fused adult skin cells with existing human embryonic stem cells, so no human eggs were involved. Although the fused cells still contained the genetic material, or DNA, from both of the two cells used (adult skin cells and embryonic stem cells), they behaved very much like embryonic stem cells. The fused cells could generate many different cell types of the body, including brain cells, hair cells, skeletal muscle and intestine and also expressed many genes that are characteristic of embryonic stem cells.” (http://www.isscr.org/visitor-types/public/)
While the job posting discussed earlier indicates that the research would be conducted on mice, it is also obvious that clinical applications would be for human embryonic stem cells. Dr. McKinney-Freeman writes a review to this point—that her work will enable human embryonic stem cell treatments. (See “Towards hematopoietic reconstitution from embryonic stem cells: a sanguine future,” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17534159).
Guillermo Oliver, Ph.D., another staff member at SJCRH, writes concerning retinal degeneration: “Various human ocular diseases due to retinal degeneration lead to vision impairment and eventually blindness. Recent advances using embryonic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells suggest that one day cell-replacement therapy will be used to treat some of these diseases (1, 2).” http://www.jci.org/articles/view/43219/files/pdf
Dr. Peter Doherty, another staff member, was one of eighty Nobel laureates to sign a letter to President George W. Bush in 2001 urging funding for research on human embryos. This letter was published in the Washington Post on February 21, 2001.
We at American Life League would like to ask the following of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital:
1. Does St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital support human embryonic stem cell research—whether or not such research is currently being conducted at any of its facilities?
2. If St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital does not support human embryonic stem cell research, why does the Hospital employ staff who are supporters of and participants in such research?
3. Will St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital publicly state its unequivocal condemnation of human embryonic stem cell research and, if so, when?
This last letter was, again, signed for; however there has been no response.
UPDATE February 2009
In February 2009, American Life League learned that a member of the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital faculty, Peter Doherty Ph.D., was one of eighty Nobel laureates to sign a letter to President George W. Bush in 2001 urging funding for research on human embryos (http://www.aau.edu/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=2938). This letter was published in the Washington Post on February 21, 2001.
That letter states, in part: “We the undersigned urge you to support Federal funding for research using human pluripotent stem cells.”
Dr. Doherty signed his name and followed it with “St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.”
Attempts to reach Dr. Doherty via the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital e-mail were not answered.
American Life League then mailed a letter to St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital asking the following:
Is/was St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital aware of Dr. Doherty’s signing of the letter to President Bush in 2001?
- Since St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital was listed after his name, was Dr. Doherty signing the letter as a representative or on behalf of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital?
- Is St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital aware of Dr. Doherty’s current position on human embryonic stem cell research and , if so, does he still support this kind of research?
- If Dr. Doherty is still currently a member of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital faculty and continues to maintain a position in favor of human embryonic stem cell research, how does his position affect the statement made by St. Jude Children’s Hospital in 2007?
This letter was sent on February 17, 2009 via certified, return receipt mail and was signed for by an employee of St. Jude on February 20, 2009. St. Jude has not responded to any of our questions.
Letter from St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital dated January 29, 2007
Esther M. Ashford, Quality Assurance Representative
“St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital is not involved in any research or treatment involving human embryonic stem cells. Many of our treatment protocols for various cancers and other catastrophic diseases include the use of stem cell transplants, but the stem cells used for these procedures are either harvested from adult or sibling donors or from the patient being treated (bone marrow, peripheral blood and cord blood).”
Susan G. Komen for the Cure
Dallas, TX 75244
Komen for the Cure founder hosts fundraiser for top gay activist organization
Nancy Brinker, the founder of the breast cancer research organization Komen for the Cure, has thrown her weight behind another controversial cause: gay activism. Together with her son Eric, Brinker hosted a reception for the gay legal advocacy organization Lambda Legal last month in Washington, D.C. Lambda is one of the leading organizations promoting the homosexual agenda in the country.
Former Komen Exec Ready to Fight “Planned Bullyhood”
Komen Grants Flowing to Planned Parenthood
Grants from the Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure are flowing to Planned Parenthood, as the women’s health organizations seek to rebuild their relationship after the controversy in February over the breast cancer charity’s unsuccessful attempt to defund Planned Parenthood.
Komen Sends Millions to Embryonic Stem Cell Research Centers
The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation has long upset pro-life advocates for denying the abortion-breast cancer link and sending millions to the Planned Parenthood abortion business. New information shows Komen also supporting centers engaging in embryonic stem cell research. Karen Malec of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer has spent time examining Komen’s 990 Forms for the IRS for 2010 and she found that Komen has active relationships with at least five research groups or educational facilities that engage in embryonic stem cell research, which requires the destruction of unborn children in their earliest days for stem cells that have yet to help any patients.
Susan G. Komen for the Cure Donated $7.5M to Planned Parenthood in 2009
In a new interview with the Daily Caller, Komen spokesman John Hammarley provided the latest figures showing the link between the two groups. He confirmed 20 of Komen’s 122 affiliates have made donations to Planned Parenthood and, last year, those contributions totaled $7.5 million — much higher than the $731,000 Komen’s figures on its web site showed earlier this year.
Planned Parenthood Deepens Link to Breast-Cancer Group
The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation had noble beginnings, launched by Nancy Goodman Brinker in response to a promise she made to her dying sister, Susan Goodman Komen, to do all she could to eradicate breast cancer. But for years pro-lifers have opposed contributing to SGK because it not only denies that induced abortions may cause breast cancer, it also bestows financial grants to Planned Parenthood affiliates. SGK now has a webpage dedicated to defending its involvement with Planned Parenthood, including message points and a letter from a “pro-life Catholic.”
UNICEF is, undoubtedly, the most well known and, probably, the most popular UN agency among Americans. What is not well known, however, is UNICEF’s evolution from a life affirming, child saving and Nobel peace prize-winning foundation to a contraceptive-distributing, abortion-performing and sterilization-providing partner of some of the world’s most notorious “family planning” organizations.
Continue reading http://www.all.org/article/index/id/MjQyNg/
UNICEF claims children have right to confidential sex services (July 2013)
UNICEF, UNFPA fail independent audit: billions in reserves, millions unaccounted for (January 2012)
Study finds UNICEF program in West Africa fails (Jan 2010)
Child Sex Book Given Out at U.N. Summit (June 2009)
UNICEF Calls for Legal Abortion in Dominican Republic (April 2009)
Pro-Abortion UN Petition Falters; Pro-Life Initiative Numbers Surging (Oct 2008)
Nicaragua Pressured on Abortion by the UN Human Rights Committee (Oct 2008)
Massive Brazilian Vaccination Raises Suspicions of Covert Sterilization Program (Aug 2008)
UN Uses Highly Suspect Maternal Deaths Stat to Promote Global Abortion (Nov 2007)
Parents Warned Against Giving to UNICEF this Halloween – UNICEF Still Promoting Abortion (Oct 2007)
UNICEF Participates in Conference With 35 Sessions Promoting Abortion (Oct 2007)
UNICEF Among Sponsors of New Campaign Promoting Abortion (Oct 2007)
UNICEF Participates in Conference With 35 Sessions Promoting Abortion (Oct 2007)
UNICEF Among Sponsors of New Campaign Promoting Abortion (Oct 2007)
UNICEF Still Unfit to Receive Halloween Donations from Pro-Lifers (2005)
UNICEF Demands Abortion for Underage Girls without Parents Knowledge (Oct 2004)
UNICEF Halloween fund backs abortion (Oct 2000)
UNICEF: Friend or foe? (Oct 1999)
UNICEF has strayed from its original mandate (August 1999)
Vatican cuts off UNICEF
United Cerebral Palsy
1825 K Street NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20006
UCP educates, advocates and provides support services to ensure a life without limits for people with a spectrum of disabilities. UCP works to advance the independence, productivity and full citizenship of people with disabilities through an affiliate network that has helped millions.
UCP does not conduct laboratory or clinical research and none of the donations made to UCP are used for research purposes.
United Mitochondrial Disease Foundation
8085 Saltsburg Rd, Ste 201
Pittsburg, PA 15239
In an e-mail to ALL on March 29, 2012, Jean Bassett, Grants Coordinator and Membership Services, provided the UMDF’s policy on human embryonic stem cell research:
The current UMDF Grant Review Committee follows the National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines. UMDF has received only one request involving embryonic stem cells and it was not considered for funding. Given the broad scope of potential and ethical considerations, UMDF feels a blanket position is difficult and therefore addresses each research request on a case by case study.
Note: NIH guidelines allow for human embryonic stem cell research.
701 N. Fairfax Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Funds donated to the United Way can go directly to an organization that seemingly is in business for only one reason – to kill babies in the womb.
The web site for the National Abortion Federation lists the United Way as a vehicle to donate money to their organization. The National Abortion Federation is a professional association of abortionists. The National Abortion Federation also helps people find abortionists and helps pay directly for the killing of children by abortion.
A random sampling by phone and email of individual United Way agencies across America proved the United Way is indeed willing to send money to the National Abortion Federation.
See http://prolifecorner.com/a-clear-united-way-national-abortion-federation-connection/(WARNING: graphic abortion photos on webpage)
From the NAF website:
Designate Abortion Federation, National (NAF) in the United Way and the Combined Federal Campaign. If we aren’t listed in your area campaign, write in Abortion Federation, National (NAF), 1660 L Street, NW, Suite 450, Washington, DC 20036 on your pledge form.
The United Way system includes approximately 1,400 community based United Way organizations. Much like a franchise operation, the United Way of America national headquarters prepares and arranges for national advertising and celebrity spokesmen, provides logos and printed materials, and develops training manuals and programs for all areas of operations from volunteer time management to accounting and finance. Each local United Way office is independent, separately incorporated and governed by local volunteers. In exchange for the goods and services received from their national headquarters, each local group pays “voluntary dues” (approximately 1% of total funds raised) to maintain the national headquarters. Community partners often include schools, government policy makers, businesses, organized labor, financial institutions, voluntary and neighborhood associations, community development corporations and the faith community.
The United Way web site formerly stated that the agency took a “position of neutrality” on the abortion issue and that they did so because they did “not want any single issue to overshadow our mission ‘to increase the capacity of people to care for one another’.” The UW position statement further stated that “no United Way funds are currently used, or have ever been used to support abortion services … Volunteers of each independent local United Way organization make all funding decisions.” The website no longer includes any position statements from the national office. It is the board, or funding committee, of the local UW that determines the “participating groups” which receive the funding.
In many communities, blatantly anti-life, anti-family groups like Planned Parenthood are receiving funds — one needs only investigate the participating agencies listed on the web site or perform an Internet search of “United Way Planned Parenthood”. The UW claims that “UW funded programs through Planned Parenthood include community health maintenance, e.g. communicable disease prevention; medical care service; family planning; health education; public awareness service; and family preservation and strengthening services, e.g. counseling and family life education. Nevertheless, this is an often-used excuse by agencies that fail to recognize that there is no accountability for exactly how their funds are used by participating agencies or any evidence that funds used for stated programs are not freeing up funds that can be used for abortion services. The funding of Planned Parenthood in any way shape or form is necessarily the funding of evil practices – no matter how one looks at it.