{"id":169704,"date":"2017-07-26T12:56:41","date_gmt":"2017-07-26T16:56:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=169704"},"modified":"2024-07-30T23:49:33","modified_gmt":"2024-07-31T04:49:33","slug":"abortion-reversal-really-scary-new-tactic-abortion-supporters-just-fear-implications","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/abortion-reversal-really-scary-new-tactic-abortion-supporters-just-fear-implications\/","title":{"rendered":"Is ‘abortion pill reversal’ really a ‘scary new tactic,’ or do abortion supporters just fear its implications?"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

For some inexplicable reason, abortion advocates cannot stand the idea of “abortion pill reversal<\/a>.” The stunning new medical advancement allows women who have taken the first dose of the abortion pill regimen<\/a>\u00a0(and regret it) to potentially stop the abortion and save their baby. As people who like to call themselves “pro-choice,” you’d think this would be a relatively unoffensive procedure; after all, it gives women more<\/em> choices, which is what abortion advocates claim to be fighting for. Right?<\/p>\n

Wrong. The battle over “abortion pill reversal” reveals that this isn’t about promoting choice; it’s about promoting abortion itself.<\/p>\n

Glamour magazine recently published an article referring to abortion reversal as a “scary new tactic”<\/a> from “anti-abortion activists.”<\/p>\n

“Medical abortions have given more women freedom to terminate their pregnancies — though access to the abortion pill also has faced plenty of limitations — and as a result, the anti-abortion movement is taking a new approach to further subvert a woman’s right to choose: by propagating the idea that abortion often leads to regret and a medical abortion can easily be reversed,” Maggie Mallon wrote. She then went on to attack the doctor who pioneered the “abortion pill reversal” procedure, Dr. George Delgado. She also argued that feeling regret after taking RU-486, the abortion pill, is extremely rare, and that very few women seek out abortion reversal.<\/p>\n

While the idea that women do not regret their abortions is not only false, but based on shoddy science, even if Mallon was correct about few women seeking out abortion reversal, does it really make sense to deprive those women of the option? After all, isn’t this about choice<\/em>? Or is Mallon actually arguing that women shouldn’t have the option to change their minds?<\/p>\n

Ultimately, this is yet another example of the pro-abortion lobby desperately trying to attack a medical advancement that could potentially damage the pro-abortion agenda. This long line of attacks includes trying to prevent women from seeing ultrasounds and even\u00a0lying about fetal development<\/a> —\u00a0attacks which might lead a reasonable person to conclude that pro-abortion activists are first and foremost concerned with not just making sure that abortion remains legal, but that abortion becomes as widespread and commonplace as possible.<\/p>\n

While pro-abortion activists try to claim that the treatment is not necessary — that women could just choose to not take the second pill and their babies would not be harmed — the reality of how RU-486 works proves that theory wrong.<\/p>\n

Dr. Karen Poehailos is a board-certified family physician who offers “abortion pill reversal,” and spoke to Live Action about the process<\/a>. “First you have to understand how the pill itself works,” Poehailos said. “It\u2019s a two-step process; the first is mifepristone, and it is an antagonist of progesterone. So it blocks progesterone from getting to the placenta, or it tries to. If you block it, and the progesterone can\u2019t get there, the placenta will begin to break down, and that\u2019s what leads to the death of the baby. It doesn\u2019t actually attack the baby; it\u2019s basically starving the baby out by attacking the placenta. And then 48 hours later, if the abortion hasn\u2019t already been completed, she would take the second pill, which is the misoprostol, which would induce labor to expel the placenta and the baby. Then she is supposed to go back in two weeks to ensure that it was complete.”<\/p>\n

Dr. Anthony Levatino, a former abortionist, also explains the procedure here:<\/p>\n