Former Planned Parenthood exec working at Georgetown NHS

Planned_Parenthood_Logo, a Catholic news and commentary site, is in the midst of a series on Catholic schools that point their students toward careers with Planned Parenthood. And in their digging, they turned up something about an adjunct instructor at Georgetown’s School of Nursing and Health Studies that they found interesting—before she worked at Georgetown, Roberta Geidner-Antoniotti worked for Planned Parenthood.

According to her curriculum vitae (download it here), Geidner-Antoniotti was President and CEO of the Mahoning Valley Planned Parenthood from 1990 to 1997, where she increased increased donor loyalty and giving and patient numbers. She held the same job from 1998 to 2000 with Planned Parenthood’s Maryland branch and was an acting project manager with Planned Parenthood Federation of America in the interim.

More recently, she was the CFO of the Whitman-Walker Clinic and has won a host of public awards. At Georgetown, Geidner-Antoniotti is involved with strategic planning and execution.

Geidner-Antoniotti is not trained as a medical doctor (she has a master degree in applied sociology) and does not hold a seem to hold a teaching position at Georgetown, but that didn’t seem to matter to Dr. Jeff Mirus,’s president, who wrote an excoriating editorial to accompany the news piece.

“Any association of this type on the part of a Catholic university is, of course, reprehensible, but it adds insult to injury that the woman in question, Roberta Lynn Geidner-Antoniotti, teaches in the nursing program,” he wrote. “Apparently Georgetown is in the forefront of the contemporary redefinition of health care to include murder.”

9 Comments on “Former Planned Parenthood exec working at Georgetown NHS

  1. Just look at those comments after the article:

    I am a member of a Jesuit parish and it pains me to attend mass, I never know what innovations may come up: everyone to wash their feet on Holy Thursday, the lay communion ministers and altar servers receive the blessed sacrament around the altar before the congregation, priest asks the congregation to say the prayer of peace after the exchange of peace, lay preachers for the homliy, a hurried eucharistic prayer, jokes and chatter form the choir director before mass is over. St Ignatius help!

    Goodness me! Saying the prayer of peace after the exchange of peace? What will those godless Jesuits come up with next?

  2. These complainers need to realize a couple of things. First, we are a Catholic University. By definition, and by University statute, we are a place where ideas can be discussed openly. Second, this woman is in a position where she is doing strategic planning. Based on her track record, it seems like she is pretty good at that. God forbid we have someone who is qualified for and good at their job in a position at this University!

  3. Matt, that comment is hilarious, mainly because that perfectly describes my non-Jesuit, secular Catholic Church home parish. Maybe it’s not just the Jesuits, but priests who realize that the Catholic Church must adapt every once in a while.

  4. I find the responses above quite interesting.

    First, to the response by Matt, followed up by one Geoffrey Bible. What is happening here is you’re trying to avoid the substantive question: should a nominally Catholic university hire someone who was engaged in a practice that the Catholic Church holds to be fundamentally and inexcusably wrong? Lets put a different spin on it. Say, the university hired someone who was previously employed managing the Soviet Prison system. That person had impeccable personal and direction skills, under his command, the prisons housed more political dissidents, secured more ‘confessions’ through special means, and was regarded, among the poliburo, to be the their most efficient administator. Then the school hired him. Would you have this problem? No, no school would hire such a person.

    Obviously, the next response is, there is a fundamental difference between a prison camp director and a leader of an abortion clinic.

    Not according to the Catholic Church. By the Church’s teachings, both actions are fundamentally and absolutely

    Now, to the response by one so-called “Catholic Student.”
    Yes, a Catholic University can be a place of open discussion, there is no problem with that. But, Georgetown seems unwilling to make any comments leading towards any Catholic beliefs.
    Which leads to the result that, in terms of an open discussion, Georgetown is no different than any other secular university. And, as a result, why should Georgetown maintain the facade of Catholicism, if it won’t make any stand with that faith?

  5. @”Uninterested observer”

    First question: Have you graduated from Georgetown with any academic degree or are you basing your commentary on speculation from afar as to how the university actually works?

    Second question: are you suggesting that there should be an religious “purity” test for every faculty member, staff member, and student who has any full time relationship with Georgetown university? If so, how precisely do you suggest that Georgetown go about this in a way that doesn’t violate relevant non-discrimination laws?

    Third question: Have you raised similar concerns publicly at any point about the numerous ex-politicians and professors that directly contradict the Church’s teaching on social justice? If not, why not? If so, let’s see some evidence. Did you ever think about Catholic criticisms of capitalism during the building of the new business school?

    You seem like someone who is entirely ignorant of how a modern university, Catholic or not, functions, and your commentary is so hopelessly naive as to be almost unworthy of discussion. The fact is that Georgetown does and should employ people who do not believe or comport with all facets of Catholicism insofar as it is its obligation, as a university, to provide students with a wide-range of scholarly thought. I have no problem with the university employing professors who adhere to pro-choice views on abortion since students should be fully capable of discussing and dealing with those ethical debates, even if you and the Church disagree with those views. Your suggestion would lead to ignorant insularity where students are not taught to think critically but to blindly accept dogma. That is absurd for any university and ought to be rejected on face.

    Frankly, as a non-Catholic who attends Georgetown, I would have no problem with the university dropping its so-called Catholic “façade.” But, while you’re off preaching about how Georgetown has strayed so far, keep in mind that its position as a Jesuit university gets people who otherwise would not consider Catholicism for a moment to seriously reflect on the merits and value of it. Your brand of “purity” has no place in any serious academic institution and would do more to damage Catholicism than help it.

  6. Pingback: Vox Populi » Catholic Culture finds more Georgetown faculty with Planned Parenthood connections

  7. @Uniterested Observer:

    The poster above has it quite right. My post earlier, posting what someone commented on the original article, highlighted the point: these people obsessed with ‘purity’ tests are (a) laughable, and (b) sad – for the same reason.

    A person who seriously grumbles about a few changes in how Mass is said is missing the forest through the trees. Good god – jokes and chatter from the choir director! Everyone gets to wash their feet on Holy Thursday, instead of just twelve men (this was inserted into the Mass in 1955, but don’t bother about that)! Drive away the receptive public with your bah-humbuggery.

    The same goes for a university. It’s one thing to have a core message — we’re officially for this, against this, etc. — and to tell it to students, it’s another to ban any form of dissent by categorically excluding anyone who has ever had a position contra the Catholic Church from teaching at Georgetown. If you think that’s the best way to train students to think critically, think again.

    Also, on an unrelated note, can Georgetown even discriminate on such a basis? Even though they’re a private university, they certainly couldn’t refuse to hire blacks or Jews, right?

  8. @Matt: You’re right; Georgetown cannot discriminate against anyone based on race, sex, creed, sexual orientation, etc. It’s part of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act. Furthermore, it would seem that, in the interest of encouraging an appreciation of open dialogue among its students and remaining a truly modern research university, it would be in Georgetown’s interest to hire faculty purely on the basis of merit.

    However, on another note, is one’s personal views even relevant in a university setting, considering that professors are never supposed to reveal their personal views (except, perhaps, in an informal setting, but never during a lecture)?

  9. Pingback: St Michael Society » Georgetown University Administrative Ties to Planned Parenthood

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>