As a self-proclaimed recovering Catholic, I become indignant, no, enraged, when people use religion as a tool of manipulation. And although the abuse of institutionalized religion is and always will be a permanent fixture of society, I am no less aggravated by those who turn a blind eye to the endless manipulation and confusion perpetuated by self-righteous hypocrites. I am referring to those individuals and institutions that are so blinded by their evangelical calling that they are unable to recognize when their messages of truth and goodwill have become lost in the face of ambition and misguided interpretations. However, I do maintain respect for those who seek to explore human spirituality in the pursuit of truth, whether or not they choose to do so through organized religion. My only qualm is with those who abuse and distort the wisdom and truth of the spiritually enlightened doctrine to which they claim to ascribe.
A little over a year ago, I read an article in the Pasadena Weekly by Tina Dupuy entitled "Babies and Bibles" http://www.pasadenaweekly.com/cms/story/detail/babies_bibles/7127/. The story described a young undercover reporter's visit to a pregnancy clinic in Glendale. Through her own personal experience and through researching the experiences of others, Dupuy discovers that the clinic preys on young women who go in for a pregnancy test and leave "fearing eternal damnation." Pretty intense stuff, right?
The clinic, called Avenues, offers free pregnancy tests and counseling to women in an effort to help them "make the best and most responsible decision for herself and for her baby." By that description some might inquire about whether or not that includes the option of abortion. However, the pregnancy clinic's mission statement says that it seeks to affirm the "value of life" and "present Biblical truth resulting in changed lives to the glory of God." (For the full mission statement go to: http://www.avenuespregnancyclinic.com/). Avenues is a religious pro-life pregnancy clinic, a minor detail not detectable by any physical text or symbol outside of the clinic.
A little over a year ago, I read an article in the Pasadena Weekly by Tina Dupuy entitled "Babies and Bibles" http://www.pasadenaweekly.com/cms/story/detail/babies_bibles/7127/. The story described a young undercover reporter's visit to a pregnancy clinic in Glendale. Through her own personal experience and through researching the experiences of others, Dupuy discovers that the clinic preys on young women who go in for a pregnancy test and leave "fearing eternal damnation." Pretty intense stuff, right?
The clinic, called Avenues, offers free pregnancy tests and counseling to women in an effort to help them "make the best and most responsible decision for herself and for her baby." By that description some might inquire about whether or not that includes the option of abortion. However, the pregnancy clinic's mission statement says that it seeks to affirm the "value of life" and "present Biblical truth resulting in changed lives to the glory of God." (For the full mission statement go to: http://www.avenuespregnancyclinic.com/). Avenues is a religious pro-life pregnancy clinic, a minor detail not detectable by any physical text or symbol outside of the clinic.
The problem? As Dupuy points out in her article, Avenues employs a deceptive approach to the pregnant women who visit the clinic. With a sign outside the clinic that reads, "FREE PREGNANCY TESTS," women enter the clinic expecting to be provided this service and nothing more if they so choose. As with any medical procedure, these women expect to be treated free of judgment and provided with all relevant information for their specific situation. This is not the case at Avenues.
The article describes a backroom in the facility where women seeking pregnancy tests are taken to be counseled while they await their results. They are confronted about "living in sin" and are offered the opportunity to give their life over to Jesus Christ. These women are told that their eternal soul is in jeopardy and that unless they discontinue their sinful behavior (aka sex before marriage), they are going to suffer eternal damnation.
I suppose preying on the frightened and vulnerable is a good way to get converts.
The article describes a backroom in the facility where women seeking pregnancy tests are taken to be counseled while they await their results. They are confronted about "living in sin" and are offered the opportunity to give their life over to Jesus Christ. These women are told that their eternal soul is in jeopardy and that unless they discontinue their sinful behavior (aka sex before marriage), they are going to suffer eternal damnation.
I suppose preying on the frightened and vulnerable is a good way to get converts.
My mother, Marilu Fresquez, worked as the managing RN at Avenues for a year and a half. After approximately three months into her employment at Avenues, my mother's supervisor banned her from entering this backroom with patients present. The only individual at the clinic with a license to practice medicine was not allowed with patients during their initial intake.
Perhaps it would be too much of a conflict of interest to provide accurate medical information to the same individual who is being told that she should prioritize forgiveness over her own physical well-being?
But why make skeptical assumptions when I can make a thoroughly educated assumption based on first-hand information? Had my mother followed suit with the traditional procedure of scaring women into agreeing to keep their baby and committing to practicing abstinence, there would have been no reason to remove her. As a nurse however, my mother's first commitment is to provide her patients with accurate medical advice, not holy conversion.
But this was not the first nor last time the clinic has, in my opinion, unjustly singled out their only licensed medical practitioner. As a precursor to the banning several months ago, my mother received an exceptionally low score on her employee evaluation from her supervisor at Avenues. She was very embarrassed and upset by these results but eventually explained to me the reason that they gave her for the low score. This time, her superiors were very clear:
A low rate of who? What??! Have we reverted back to the 14th century Holy Roman Empire??
With the new information I have about the clinic and better understanding of its bottom line, the downgrade in her score for not converting enough vulnerable pregnant women to Christianity no longer comes as a terrible shock. However, I am no less disgusted that rather than being evaluated on her ability to provide medical expertise, she is being punished for making the physical well-being of her patients the highest priority.
In spite of the religious extremism practiced by the clinic, I will point out that what Dupuy does not mention in her article are the generous donations of time and resources (baby food, diapers, clothes etc.) that Avenues provides for expectant mothers who do choose to keep their babies. But then again, whose "choice" is it really? Both my mother and my initial view of pregnancy clinics like Avenues was that it provided assistance to women by easing their transitions to motherhood - not forcing them to have their baby and convert or face an eternity of damnation. My mother has worked in prenatal care for many years and could have had a much more prestigious position with double the salary at a legitimate hospital. Instead she chose a lesser paying job so that she could be of service to women unable to afford healthcare and lacking the resources and education to properly provide for a newborn child.
But this was not the first nor last time the clinic has, in my opinion, unjustly singled out their only licensed medical practitioner. As a precursor to the banning several months ago, my mother received an exceptionally low score on her employee evaluation from her supervisor at Avenues. She was very embarrassed and upset by these results but eventually explained to me the reason that they gave her for the low score. This time, her superiors were very clear:
"Marilu Fresquez has a low rate of salvations."
A low rate of who? What??! Have we reverted back to the 14th century Holy Roman Empire??
With the new information I have about the clinic and better understanding of its bottom line, the downgrade in her score for not converting enough vulnerable pregnant women to Christianity no longer comes as a terrible shock. However, I am no less disgusted that rather than being evaluated on her ability to provide medical expertise, she is being punished for making the physical well-being of her patients the highest priority.
In spite of the religious extremism practiced by the clinic, I will point out that what Dupuy does not mention in her article are the generous donations of time and resources (baby food, diapers, clothes etc.) that Avenues provides for expectant mothers who do choose to keep their babies. But then again, whose "choice" is it really? Both my mother and my initial view of pregnancy clinics like Avenues was that it provided assistance to women by easing their transitions to motherhood - not forcing them to have their baby and convert or face an eternity of damnation. My mother has worked in prenatal care for many years and could have had a much more prestigious position with double the salary at a legitimate hospital. Instead she chose a lesser paying job so that she could be of service to women unable to afford healthcare and lacking the resources and education to properly provide for a newborn child.
At this point I might initiate a discussion on Planned Parenthood and probably juxtapose the two. However let's face it, there is no comparison. At any rate, I'm not up for the controversy today...
P.S. Mom works at Red Cross now. She is very happy. More to come.
