Institute for Women's Health - Bias and Credibility

RIGHT BIAS

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using an appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports, and omit information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Overall, we rate the Institute for Women’s Health as Right-Biased based on its advocacy for conservative policy. We also rate it as mixed for factual reporting due to a lack of transparency, poor sourcing, and one-sided reporting that leaves out context.

Detailed Report

Bias Rating: RIGHT (6.7)
Factual Reporting: MIXED (5.9)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY

History

The Institute for Women’s Health (IWH) was founded to advocate for women’s health and well-being across all life stages. The organization claims to ensure that women’s health remains a priority without being influenced by divisive policy debates. However, IWH has taken a clear stance on abortion and reproductive rights, aligning with conservative perspectives. Notably, the organization is connected to Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation initiative aimed at shaping U.S. government policy in a right-wing direction, through its President and CEO, Valerie Huber, who serves on the Project 2025 advisory board. They are based in Washington, DC.

Read our profile on the United States media and government.

Funded by / Ownership

The Institute for Women’s Health does not publicly disclose funding sources on its website. The organization states that it collaborates with governments, policymakers, think tanks, academics, NGOs, and corporations but provides no transparency regarding its financial backers. Given its alignment with Project 2025, it will likely receive funding and support from conservative political networks.

Analysis / Bias

The Institute for Women’s Health focuses on anti-abortion advocacy, often citing right-leaning or questionable sources. A key example is the article “The International Abortion Battle Is Hiding in Plain Sight”, which was originally published in The Epoch Times, a far-right news source known for misinformation and poor sourcing. The article, written by Valerie Huber, criticizes international efforts to recognize abortion as a human right and argues that such policies undermine national sovereignty.

Another example is “Abortion Is Not Health Care, Anywhere”, an op-ed by Huber originally published in Townhall, a right-wing media outlet. The piece argues that abortion should not be classified as healthcare, emphasizing instead support for women and children during pregnancy and early childhood. This position is consistent with conservative and religious anti-abortion advocacy.

In terms of other social issues, IWH does not explicitly promote anti-LGBTQ+ or anti-vaccine content on its website. However, given its ties to Project 2025, which advocates for conservative policies on gender and reproductive health, it is likely that IWH aligns with broader right-wing social policies.

The Institute for Women’s Health presents itself as a neutral women’s health advocacy organization, but its content strongly reflects a conservative, anti-abortion bias.

Failed Fact Check

None in the Last 5 years. However, they consistently rely on highly biased sources with poor fact checking records.

Overall, we rate the Institute for Women’s Health as Right Biased based on its advocacy for conservative policy. We also rate them as mixed for factual reporting due to a lack of transparency, poor sourcing, and one-sided reporting that leaves out context. (D. Van Zandt 03/02/2025)

Source: https://www.theiwh.org/

Last Updated on March 2, 2025 by Media Bias Fact Check