Archive for the ‘RU-486’ Category

The Seven Most Common Lies About Abortion

Friday, February 28th, 2014

14

This week Rolling Stone Magazine ran a piece that promised readers the truth about abortion. It was written by Lauren Rankin and presented as a news story. But Ms. Rankin is not an unbiased reporter. She is a graduate student who serves on the board of the New Jersey Abortion Access Association, which raises money to buy abortions for women who can’t afford them. They hold bowl-a-thons for abortions. You can’t make this stuff up.

The seven “lies” she sets about “debunking” are based on information available at pregnancy resource centers. This nationwide network of centers – some affiliated with organizations like CareNet or Heartbeat International, and some operating independently or as ministry outreaches – exist solely to provide actual choices to women facing unexpected pregnancies. When pro-aborts talk about “a woman’s right to choose” they only mean her right to choose abortion. But a woman who knocks on the door of one of some 3,000 pregnancy centers in the U.S. will often be given a free ultrasound onsite, but that’s just the beginning. If she’s poor or homeless, she will get help finding a place to live and referrals to agencies – government and charitable – that will help her with finances. Her first visit will lead to a continuing relationship with the people at the center, many of whom are volunteers. They will be with her through her pregnancy and often, accompany her in the birthing room. There will be assistance to get back into school or assist with job opportunities and even rides to doctor’s appointments. Will she be encouraged to choose life? Absolutely. Should we apologize for that? Absolutely not.

About a year ago, a college gymnast showed up at Life Choices Resource Center in Metuchen, N.J. I serve on the board there. She knew from the moment 10 pregnancy tests confirmed her suspicions that she would have her baby. She needed help from Life Choices because she knew that everyone else in her life was going to push her toward abortion. There’s a truth about abortion you won’t read about in Rolling Stone: Many women are coerced by parents, boyfriends, husbands, employers, even guidance counselors and coaches, into abortions they would never have chosen on their own. Had this young woman gone to Planned Parenthood, she would be the mother of a dead child now. Instead, she has a three-month-old son with a full head of black hair and an angelic smile. Which choice was better? You decide.

To rebut Ms. Rankin’s biased advertorial in Rolling Stone, I will now debunk the lies that abortion profiteers and their supporters tell about abortion.

1. Lie: Abortion is not linked to breast cancer. Pro-aborts love to cite a 2003 workshop conducted by the National Institute of Health and a 2009 study by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to conclude that abortion has no link to breast cancer. That’s a lie. The 2003 workshop would not allow scientists whose research showed an abortion-breast cancer link to present at the conference. Also, many, many studies, performed before and since the 2009 study, show the so-called ABC link is a reality. In China, where abortion is mandatory for millions of women, a new study found that abortion is “significantly associated with an increased risk of breast cancer,” and that risk increases with each subsequent abortion. In India, another recent study found that multiple abortions were among the factors that caused an increased risk of breast cancer (oral contraceptives also were on the list). A study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association found a significant increase in aggressive breast cancers in young women, starting in 1976. Although the researchers said they couldn’t pinpoint a cause, they theorized that a sedentary lifestyle could be to blame. But the spike in cancer started three years after abortion became legal everywhere in the country and that can’t be a coincidence. To learn about dozens of additional studies that point to an ABC link, go to the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute’s fact sheet.

2. Lie: Abortion is not linked to infertility. As compelling evidence that breast cancer and infertility are not even tangentially related, abortion advocate Rankin offers this quote from the Mayo Clinic web site. “Abortion isn’t thought to cause fertility issues or complications in subsequent pregnancies.” Isn’t thought to cause? In case you’re not convinced, she points to research from the Guttmacher Institute (a kissing cousin of Planned Parenthood that is falsely described as “nonpartisan”) that suggests first-trimester abortion is not harming women’s fertility. Not so fast. Another study from China showed a correlation between first-trimester abortion and subsequent miscarriage. And what I know from my work with the Silent No More Awareness Campaign is that botched abortions do lead to loss of fertility or cause women to have hysterectomies. Many women who speak of their abortion regret, like Donna, aborted the only child they would ever conceive.

3. Lie: Women don’t regret their abortions. Rachel’s Vineyard is one of the world’s largest post-abortion healing ministries. Since it began in 1993, it has helped 250,000 women and men heal from their abortion experiences. In 2013 alone, more than 1,000 weekend retreats were held, and the Rachel’s Vineyard model has spread to 49 states and over 70 countries. The retreat is currently offered in 22 languages, with other translations in progress. Rachel’s Vineyard wouldn’t continue to grow if women weren’t dealing with feelings of regret after abortion. Women don’t need the endorsement of the American Psychological Association to validate their feelings. What they need is help dealing with those feelings, and they get help at Rachel’s Vineyard.

4. Lie: Women who see an ultrasound image of their baby have the abortion anyway. The Rolling Stone puff piece pointed to a report of a study that looked at 15,000 women who went to Planned Parenthood in Los Angeles for an abortion. Of those who chose to look at the ultrasound image, most had the abortion anyway. But hang on a second. The lead researcher, Dr. Mary Gatter, was on the Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles senior management team in 2012-2013. The rest of the research team has solid pro-abortion bona fides as well. Randi Zung of the Obstetrics & Gynecology journal wouldn’t divulge who funded the study, but it was very likely the same cast of population control characters who ordinarily fund studies that always come out on the side of abortion. So this is the situation: Planned Parenthood and its supporters fund research that is performed by its very own people, and the results favor those who profit from abortion, namely Planned Parenthood. One hand washes the other, and the baby is thrown out with the bath water, if you’ll pardon the mixed metaphor. Something else to consider: A woman who is on the table for an ultrasound at an abortion clinic is probably not getting out of there with her baby alive, even if she decides to choose life. Tales of women being held down and forcibly aborted are common, and even if force isn’t used, women in this vulnerable state are repeatedly assured that once the “contents of the uterus” are gone, everything will be all right. No abortionist wants to lose a sale.

5. Lie: Abortion is not psychologically damaging to women. This is basically the same lie as number three. Rolling Stone relies on a 2008 statement from the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion that said there’s no evidence that a single abortion causes mental health problems. But in that very same paragraph, it says: “The Task Force found some studies that indicate that some women do experience sadness, grief and feelings of loss following an abortion and some experience ‘clinically significant disorders, including depression and anxiety.’ ” So, in other words, mental health problems. Dr. Vincent Rue, a psychotherapist with more than 30 years’ experience working with people suffering trauma and grief after abortion, first used the phrase “post-abortion syndrome” in 1981 to describe what his patients were experiencing. The pro-abortion medical establishment has been trying to discredit the term ever since. But the syndrome doesn’t have to be officially recognized for it to cause suffering. We see it in our work every day.

6. Lie: Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider (TRAP) laws make abortion unsafe for women. The abortion industry is a master of spin. When Kermit Gosnell’s “house of horrors” was discovered in Philadelphia in 2011, pro-aborts crafted a tale so ridiculous it was hard to imagine reporters would use it in their stories, and yet they did. They insisted that toughening up oversight of abortion clinics was forcing good clinics to close and leaving the worst of them open to kill children and maim their mothers. Gosnell’s clinic had not been inspected in 17 years, even though its deficiencies were well-known and reported to city and state officials. Can you imagine a nail salon, or a veterinarian office, or a portable toilet for that matter, going so long between inspections? In West Virginia, abortion clinics have never been inspected! Unfettered access to abortion is seen as so important that pro-aborts think nothing of exposing women to the most horrific conditions as they fight every single proposed regulation. Gosnell’s Philadelphia clinic was not an anomaly. Here’s a house of horrors in Michigan. In Delaware. In Virginia. In New Jersey. You can find a house of horrors in every state if you’re willing to put in the time to look. This strange situation puts pro-lifers in the position of working to make abortion safer for women. Do we hope that some of these abortion regulations will close clinics? Absolutely. Does the strategy work? It does! A record-setting 87 abortion clinics closed last year alone. The latest weapon in the TRAP war is for states to pass laws, as Texas, Ohio and others have done, that force abortionists to have admitting privileges at hospitals within a reasonable distance. Many abortionists can’t get these privileges because they are quacks. They lose licenses in one state and they set up in another. Or they are circuit- rider abortionists, hopping from state to state on a weekly basis. Third-trimester abortionist LeRoy Carhart wasn’t even in Maryland anymore when Jennifer Morbelli died after an abortion at 33 weeks. That’s the state of safe, legal, rare abortion in our country (i.e. not safe, not rare).

7. Lie: Abortion does not endanger women’s health and lives. This week, GM recalled 1.37 million cars because a faulty ignition had led to 13 deaths. Although we know that many women are killed by abortion and the cause is covered up on their death certificates, the Centers for Disease Control concedes that eight women died after a legal abortion in 2009 in the U.S. But isn’t that eight too many? Aren’t the lives of these women, these pregnant women – these mothers – as valuable as the drivers whose faulty ignitions killed them? We know that by September 2011, 14 women had died from RU-486 abortions, and yet instead of being recalled, the drugs are still considered the next best thing in abortion. Post-abortion depression is also killing women, and you don’t have to reach back very far to find examples. The Australian actress Charlotte Dawson committed suicide this week. In a television interview that was later reported in the Daily Mail, the actress discussed her marriage to Olympic-hopeful Scott Miller and the abortion she had to keep him from being distracted from his swimming career. That abortion triggered a depression from which she never recovered. Also this week, LifeNews reported on the tragic suicide of a young woman in England that also was linked to her abortion.

Abortion is the real war on women, and it’s killing us.

My colleagues Georgette Forney, who co-founded the Silent No More Awareness Campaign with me, and Bryan Kemper, Priests for Life’s Youth Outreach director, also were outraged at the Rolling Stone piece. Read what they had to say here and here.

Posted in Abortion Complications, Breast Cancer, Forced Abortion, Health Care, Late-term abortion, One Child Policy, Planned Parenthood, RU-486, Silent No More Awareness, Uncategorized, Women's Health | 4 Comments »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Abortion, by any other name, is still abortion

Friday, September 27th, 2013

130927 blog image JM

My colleague Marie Smith of the Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues this week brought to my attention some very disturbing news: A group of academics and researchers – whose work seems to suggest they have never met an abortion they didn’t like — is trying to drum up support and development funding for a new type of “post-fertilization contraception.” They envision a pill that women could take up to a month after an unprotected sex act resulted in pregnancy.

That’s not contraception. That’s abortion.

What these researchers laud as a potential wonder drug that “could serve more women and provide more benefit at a population level,” the rest of us recognize as another way to abort a child, with considerable risk to the mother. Imagine the hormonal horror of a pill strong enough to dislodge and kill a developing baby.

As I pointed out in the book “Recall Abortion,” the birth control pill is bad medicine, causing everything from blood clots to strokes to cancer. Emergency contraception is touted as safe as can be, but after reading patients reviews of Plan B and Ella, you don’t get such a warm and fuzzy feeling. Women talk about menstrual cycles knocked out of whack and lingering back and abdominal pain. And then there’s RU-486, whose mortality rate prompted the FDA to issue new warnings about its use even as its popularity, and profitability, grew. Make no mistake about it, RU-486 poses a great risk to women’s health.

But these hard facts aren’t enough to deter this band of population control advocates from calling for the development of yet another harmful pill. For this group, preventing birth is the ultimate and only goal.

In their article, “Embracing post-fertilisation methods of family planning: a call to action,” published in the Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care, the group helpfully notes that “A woman could potentially use a post-fertilisation method on a planned schedule only once in each menstrual cycle, no matter how many prior coital acts she had had in that cycle.” The promise of spontaneity and a complete freedom from personal responsibility is what will sell this do-it-yourself abortion, they believe. Young women and girls who have drunk the Kool-Aid of “reproductive justice” would likely be the main targets of this population control campaign.

This pill has yet to be developed, thank God, but you can be sure that if it ever comes to market, it will be very profitable for some, and very, very detrimental to many — women and children.

To read what Marie Smith wrote about “post-fertilization contraception,” click here:

To sign a petition to get abortion off the market, go to www.recallabortion.com

Posted in Abortion, Contraception, Family, Health Care, RU-486, Women's Health | 1 Comment »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

RU-486 and the return of the coat hanger

Friday, September 13th, 2013

JM 130913 blog image

I’m wondering when we changed the definition of “health care” to include women and girls self-aborting at home and flushing the remains of their babies down the toilet. Isn’t RU-486 just the modern version of the coat hanger?

The use, and misuse, of RU-486 is getting a lot of pro-abortion ink these days, as the Supreme Court seems poised to hear a case from Oklahoma that could limit the way doctors prescribe the abortion drugs.

When the FDA approved the use of RU-486 in this country in 2000, the protocol called for several office visits for women planning to abort their children through a medication abortion. The first pill was given the first day, and the pill that causes contractions was given on the second visit, two or three days later. But Planned Parenthood and other providers saw the opportunity for a greater financial dividend by allowing women to take the second set of medications alone at home after receiving the first dose from a doctor. Then along came telemedicine, which allowed doctors to dispense the deadly drugs via video conference, so doctors never once examined their abortion-bound patients. Seventeen states have since banned abortion by telemedicine, and that ban is included in the Oklahoma law now in dispute.

But it’s another portion of the law that pro-aborts are concentrating on in Oklahoma. The initial FDA approval allowed the use of the drugs through seven weeks of pregnancy but doctors have decided it’s effective through nine weeks. Also, FDA approval came with a set of instructions that indicated the second dose of medication was to be swallowed, but some abortionists are telling women it is more effective if allowed to dissolve in the mouth or used as a vaginal suppository. And now it has become standard practice to send women home to take the second dose (Less mess for the clinic workers). This “off-label” use of the drug is what the Supreme Court could rule on, if it ultimately hears the case.

This week, the pro-abortion writer Emily Bazelon and the editorial board of the DesMoines Register have become cheerleaders for off-label use of RU-486, pointing out, correctly, that many drugs have turned out to be effective for things other than their originally intended purpose. But history has shown that off-label use is not always a good thing. The sleep aid Thalidomide was not intended as a treatment for morning sickness in pregnant women, and not long after it began to be prescribed off-label, an epidemic of profound and tragic birth defects resulted. More recently, Neurontin, a drug approved for the treatment of epilepsy and nerve pain, began being prescribed to bipolar patients. The drug didn’t really help and for at two patients at least, may have played a role in their suicides. Pfizer, the drug’s maker, agreed to pay a $430 million settlement to end lawsuits against it.

RU-486 has proved itself to be deadly too. Several years after approving it, the FDA took notice that it was killing some women. New labeling warnings were issued that, according to the FDA website, “were prompted by reports of serious bacterial infection, bleeding, ectopic pregnancies that have ruptured, and death… The warnings point out that serious bacterial infection and sepsis may occur without the usual signs of infection, such as fever and tenderness on examination. The warnings also caution providers that prolonged, heavy bleeding may warrant surgical intervention.”

As we wait for the Supreme Court to rule on off-label uses for RU-486, let’s hear from some women who decided that an abortion at home was the best choice for them.

At About.com, on the Women’s Health message boards, a woman from England wrote:
“I would not recommend this to anyone. It was the most painful and traumatic experience I have ever had to go through. It was so painful and the whole process lasted about five hours and I felt like I was in labor. I was violently sick and this awful experience lives with me today. I would not recommend anyone to opt to have this done if you have the option.”

A teenager who posted at SteadyHealth.com had this to say:
“I’m 16 and I too had a medical abortion. The pain that I went through after dissolving the four tablets in my cheeks was crippling and crept on me only 20 minutes after leaving the clinic. I was crawled up (sic) in a ball and rolling around on the floor. I couldn’t tell my parents because I didn’t want to explain the pregnancy.”

Another post at SteadyHealth was from a woman in her 30s who had the abortion at home with her boyfriend, a nurse. She took the first pill at an unnamed Planned Parenthood clinic:

“Exactly 25 hours after the mifepristone, I took 4 pills of misoprostol (880 mg), the prostaglandin that would start the contractions. I let the pills dissolve with some candy next to my cheeks. The 800 mg is double the amount recommended by the FDA but I was not aware of this until I did some fact-checking on PP. They prescribe a higher amount due to some inabsorption due to throwing up the pills, and to guarantee the medical dosage is high enough to prevent partial or incomplete miscarriage. I did throw up 45 minutes after the pills went into my mouth, so I hoped I got the medicine I needed. I tried taking analgesics but also threw those up soon after, so I had no choice but to endure the pain.

“Pain: Worst pain ever. No joke, no exaggeration. Awful, terrible, unquitting, terror. I don’t want to scare everyone here, but this was my experience. Some women only experience mild cramping, mine was severe. It vacillated from a 6 on the pain scale to an 8.5, never going down below a 4. This was without a break, started 45 minutes after the pills and increased to a crescendo 2 hours in. I couldn’t walk or talk. Just whimper and lay next to the toilet. Taking turns throwing up, diarrhea, and just writhing in pain. My boyfriend was at a loss of how to help me. All I could think of is will this ever end? Please just stop so I can breathe for 3 seconds! I had no energy to cry, just try to curl up and hope this will go away. I couldn’t hold down the vicodin for longer than 15 minutes so I hardly got any relief from that. I was not really bleeding at all either so all the cramping felt meaningless.”

So this is where we are today. Pro-lifers who want abortion to end are the ones insisting that until that day, women should be protected from unscrupulous practitioners and dangerous procedures, like off-label use of RU-486, and pro-choicers are the ones insisting that access to abortion “on demand and without apology” is much more important than any woman’s life.

If you stop to think about it, you’ll see that abortion turns everything upside down — the First Amendment, the Hippocratic Oath, parental rights, even common sense. But we can’t just throw up our hands and learn to live with the modern version of the coat hanger, no matter what the Supreme Court ultimately says about RU-486. We have to get rid of abortion by documenting every single instance where it proves to be a bad product, and then we have to recall it. Pull it from the shelves.

If you agree with me that we need a nationwide abortion recall, please go to RecallAbortion.com and sign the petition.

Posted in Contraception, Health Care, RU-486 | 2 Comments »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.