Is this Planned Parenthood memo real?
June 9, 2011 9:27 AM   Subscribe

Is this 1969 memo from PP-WP VP (hehe) Frederick Jaffe outlining population-reducing strategies real? If real, is it significant i.e. anything more than speculation on his part? http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=49&action=inline

Here is one link to the PDF. Copies of this PDF are on other websites as well according to Google. http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=49&action=inline

Please do not speculate on whether it is "likely" or "unlikely" to be real based on your political or religious opinion! I'm looking for something I can sink my teeth into.

Please try to have no opinion on whether anything in the document is a good or bad idea.

I feel like I can't say it enough. Please do not debate the ethics or politics of the issue that the document writer was concerned about. This is a history question.
posted by michaelh to Society & Culture (6 answers total) 3 users marked this as a favorite
 
Best answer: I can't find the original source for the pdf (the 1969 memo), but the source of the source of the pdf as stated in the bottom left hand corner (""A Family Planning Perspectives Special Supplement" published by Planned Parenthood-World Population, NYC, NY, 19.70) is real, and is here -- specifically, page 9 (ix). (note, I'm on a university campus right now with excellent library and whatnot, so I don't know if this is visible to everyone, if it's not visible to you and you want it memail me). The main JSTOR page for the journal is here. This journal is definitely friendly to Jaffe (and has many articles by him), and is in fact supporting the memo, so it has me convinced of the memo's veracity.

I only skimmed, so do not assume I am correct here, but my understanding is it's meant to be a summary of recommendations that someone said once and exist, NOT a summary of the author's recommendations or of any particular person's recommendations, just a list of recommendations that exist.
posted by brainmouse at 9:58 AM on June 9, 2011


Best answer: Previously, particularly this answer: "Ok, I checked it out and found a copy of the article and an original of that table. It's legit, but completely misrepresented. Basically, people involved with Planned Parenthood as well as other population organizations wrote about the various propositions for population control floating around at that time and ranked them according to feasbility, impact, ethics etc. Never once were these ideas supported by Planned Parenthood as an organization. I wasn't able to save copies of the articles, but I intend to go back to the library where I access them and do enough research to write something to put up on the web."
posted by googly at 10:03 AM on June 9, 2011


Best answer: Yes the 1970 article is this one: U.S. Population Growth and Family Planning: A Review of the Literature. Robin Elliott, Lynn C. Landman, Richard Lincoln and Theodore Tsuoroka
Family Planning Perspectives Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1970), pp. i-xvi

It's a review of the literature so it's listing various proposals.
posted by interplanetjanet at 10:05 AM on June 9, 2011


Best answer: Berelson wrote an article talking about the these different proposals that is available here. He is clearly talking about what has been proposed, rather than what is advisable.

There is an USAID document called "World Population Crisis" that is an internal history of how this issue was addressed. Berelson shows up in it quite a bit, Jaffe not so much.
posted by OmieWise at 10:07 AM on June 9, 2011


Response by poster: Thanks, everyone. All good answers.
posted by michaelh at 12:21 PM on June 9, 2011


Mod note: Final update from the OP:
I had the pleasure of being contacted yesterday regarding this question by Dave Jaffe, son of Frederick Jaffe about which the question was concerned. He uploaded for me the memo including citations.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:51 PM on June 4, 2013


« Older Project Managment Software for Architects (of the...   |   MS Access is making things harder than they need... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.