Abortion
UK – Many Politicians hear evidence from experts on dangers of DIY abortions
In the last week of March 2021, a large number of Politicians attended a webinar to hear evidence from experts on the dangers of DIY abortions that put women at risk. Dr Calum Miller, an NHS (National Health Services) doctor and research associate at the University of Oxford who specialises in abortion policy, showed the inherent flaws in the practice of ‘telemed’ abortions. He provided evidence to politicians not only of the medical risks involved but also of how easy it was for coercion to take place.
Kevin Duffy, a former Global Director of Clinics Development at one of the world’s largest abortion providers, Marie Stopes International (now MSI Reproductive Choices) highlighted many serious medical risks and safety concerns arising from DIY abortions. In particular, Duffy provided evidence that there is massive underreporting of medical complications arising from DIY abortions. How? He used data obtained largely from Freedom of Information Requests sent to six different NHS trusts/hospitals. Further analysis of the data shows that “every month, 495 women attended hospital with complications arising from retained products of conception (RPOC) after a medical abortion.
Every month, 250 women after using the abortion pills, required hospital treatment to surgically remove retained baby body parts. Quoting several sources, Dr Calum Miller, noted that “abusers might be listening in on [telemedicine phone consultation] conversations” said the New England Journal of Medicine; “Consultations, when possible, are offered online, which may introduce further barriers to accessing support” said the UN Office of Drugs and Crime; and some women’s “living arrangements may not permit the privacy and confidentiality appropriate for patient care” said the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Dr Miller referred to recent research on the subject as well, noting one study which found that a quarter of women seeking an abortion were pressured by a partner to do so. Polling from earlier this year shows 87% of GPs were concerned that women were at risk of unwanted abortion arising from domestic abuse by partners controlling or monitoring their actions.
Similarly, recent polling of the general public found 86% of women were concerned about women being at risk of being coerced into an abortion by a partner or family member during the ‘at-home’ abortion process. Furthermore, 86% of GPs surveyed across the UK were concerned about women having a medical abortion past the legal limitof ten weeks’ gestation. Concern was highest among female doctors (91%). More
USA – New longitudinal study shows Abortion causes mental health problems
A new study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found that abortion not only aggravates pre-existing mental illness but also can mark the onset of problems for women with no history of psychiatric disorders. The researchers examined more than 1.9 million medical claim records of women that induced abortion or had miscarriage of a first pregnancy and found that it increased the risk of postpartum mental health problems by 10 to 35%. It is the first peer-reviewed study to carefully control variables related to a prior history of mental illness and the timing of the first episode of mental health problems. Lead author of the study Dr David Reardon is not surprised with the results and says “There is no question about the fact that abortion can aggravate pre-existing mental illness. But there are also women who report that the abortion marked the onset of problems that did not previously exist. Our data confirms that both pathways are true.” “Unresolved memories and feelings about pregnancy loss can lead to postpartum depression and even psychosis during a subsequent pregnancy.
Unresolved emotions will demand one’s attention sooner or later. I have spent the last 35 years treating pregnancy loss and unresolved grief for those struggling in the aftermath of an abortion which left them shattered with sadness, heartache, guilt, shame and anger. Many learned to numb themselves with alcohol and drugs. Some re-enact their abortion experience with promiscuity and repeat abortions, trapped in traumatic cycles of abandonment and rejection. Others suffer eating disorders, panic attacks, depression, anxiety, and thoughts of suicide. Some have permanent physical and reproductive damage that rendered them unable to have children in the future. The excruciating level of pain I have witnessed inspired me to establish a treatment model to address the unique and complicated grief for both women and men who have lost a child through abortion. That program, Rachel’s Vineyard, is a psychological and spiritual journey for healing after abortion that has spread to more than 80 countries and is offered in dozens of languages throughout the world. Pregnancy loss is a death experience. It is the demise of human potential, relationship, responsibility, maternal attachment, connectedness, and innocence. Such a loss is rarely experienced without conflict and ambivalence.” MDPI, Lifesite News
USA – FDA endangers women by lifting safety restrictions on abortion pills
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has planned to lift safety restrictions on abortion pills that get posted to women without in-person consultation. The American Association of Prolife Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) who represents 7,000 women’s healthcare practitioners, have expressed deep concern in over the FDA’s decision and have issued a statement detailing their concerns has healthcare practitioners who will not support this due it jeopardizing the lives of their patients. A recent analysis of the Adverse Events submitted to the FDA with the safety restrictions in place shows over 3000 women suffering with complications, of which 24 of these women died, and another 500 would have died if they had not reached emergency medical care in time. These numbers will only increase if the current safety restrictions, that require a woman be seen and evaluated by a licensed healthcare practitioner before receiving abortion pills, are removed. This requirement is not restrictive – it is protective.
Many women are pressured into abortions by their partner, a family member, or a trafficker. Oftentimes, their visit with a physician in early pregnancy is the only chance these women will have to expose this pressure they’re facing. Screening for abuse and trafficking is inadequate during a telemed visit because the physician cannot control the environment of the woman on the other end of the screen, or know who is hovering behind the computer screen. AAPLOG would like the FDA and American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists to explain why women seeking abortions deserve substandard medical care that places their lives at risk. AAPLOG, AAPLOG
UK – Influential committee criticizes legislation without discussion
Very influential, The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (SLSC), a body within the House of Lords that scrutinizes proposed legislation, has released its Fifty First Report which draws “special attention” to Northern Ireland abortion regulations which enable Brandon Lewis to take action on rolling out abortion services in Northern Ireland. The committee pointed out that preventing discussion before the legislation takes effect “is particularly inappropriate when that policy is likely to be controversial, and the House may wish to ask the Minister to explain that decision”. In addition to its criticism of the swift passing of this legislation, the SLSC was able to pose a series of questions raising points that had been made by organizations, including Right To Life UK, in their submissions to the Committee. Publications Parliament, Right to Life
USA – Elective abortions for medical research resume
Federal officials have removed the Trump Administration restrictions on elective abortion fetal tissue for medical research. Government scientists will now continue to use fetal tissue that has in the past led to treatments for a variety of diseases, including COVID-19. Scientists at universities also can now apply for federal grants without getting approval from a special ethics panel for any such work. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra determined there were “no new ethical issues that require special review,” so the agency will return to using procedures that had been in place for decades before then-President Donald Trump’s administration changed the policy in June 2019, a statement from the agency said. More