BRUSSELS, BELGIUM, March 29, 2012, ( – The European Union is funding the world’s largest abortion providers and underwriting abortion in the Third World in an apparent violation of the law, according to a new report by a European pro-life organization.

An analysis released by European Dignity Watch found the EU subsidizes the world’s largest abortion providers under the guise of “sexual and reproductive health” (SRH).

“Two of the major beneficiaries [of] EU funds allocated to SRH [sexual and reproductive health] have been and continue to be International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and Marie Stopes International (MSI),” according to EDW, which took more than a year to produce the 40-page document.

Marie Stopes, which performs more abortions worldwide than IPPF, received a minimum of nine million euros ($12 million U.S.) in 2005 and 2009 alone, EDW discovered. This does not include funds the European Commission appropriated for MSI and “refused to disclose,” citing “commercial interests.” MSI declares it has received more than $30 million in all.


(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

The EU did not disclose how much money it gave to the international arm of Planned Parenthood.

Sophia Kuby, executive director of European Dignity Watch, told via e-mail that since EU member nations disagree on abortion policy, the union is barred from using common funds for the practice. “This is clearly laid down in European law,” Kuby said.

“The EU definition of SRH explicitly excludes abortion and, moreover, prohibits not only the funding, but the promotion of incentives of abortion, sterilization, and improper testing of contraception methods in developing countries,” Kuby said. “There is a blatant conflict between the definition of the EU of SHR and the core strategies of IPPF and MSI that is to increase abortion worldwide.”

“The funding of Marie Stopes International and the International Planned Parenthood Foundation would appear to be in violation of prohibitions against funding the performance of abortion abroad,” Stephan Phelan, communications director at Human Life International, told

The grant recipients do not explicitly state they provide abortions with the funds, but IPPF admits to providing “emergency contraception” in Bolivia, Peru, and Guatemala. The catchall term often refers to abortion-inducing drugs.

MSI also hides behind the term “menstrual regulations,” which it performs in Bangladesh, a nation where abortion is illegal except to save the mother’s life. “This is the same process that is termed a ‘surgical abortion’ by the medical field” – including the Alan Guttmachiner Institutes – “except that a ‘menstrual regulation’ is performed on a woman who suspects rather than knows she is pregnant,” Kuby told LifeSiteNews. MSI personnel use a manual vacuum aspirator to empty the uterus without taking a pregnancy test; the evidence is then disposed of.

“This devastating EDW report appears to confirm something that HLI’s missionaries have long seen first hand: many proponents of abortion have absolutely no respect for law, just like they have no respect for the authentic well-being of women in the developing world,” Phelan told “Their drive to spread the practice of ‘menstrual regulation’ in countries that suffer from severe poverty risks creating scores of dangerous back alley abortionists, under the pretense of improving maternal health.”

“Are the EU’s budgets for Development Aid and Public Health used to finance abortions in developing countries?” asked Kuby. “Is this legal?”

EDW is asking the EU to investigate its funding, demanding Members of European Parliament (MEPs) press for full disclosure of this money.

European should contact “elected Member of European Parliament and ask them about this issue and what they intend to do to stop this misuse of EU funding,” said Kuby.

“For all non-Europeans,” Kuby continued, “spread the word, publish this information if you can and get involved with good organizations who are committed to the cause of life. ”



Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.