If women have the opportunity and desire to change their mind about a medical procedure before going through with it, should we grant them the information to do so?
Or should we withhold it?
The question might seem preposterous in 2021, when most people would generally agree that informed consent is central to ethical medical care.
Yet this is being debated in the state of Indiana today.
The bill does not require that the woman pursue abortion pill reversal; it merely adds to her education ahead of the abortion, ensuring that if she changes her mind, she has the information needed to save her child’s life.
Because women do, in fact, change their minds about having an abortion. Sometimes this is before ever scheduling an appointment; sometimes it is after canceling an appointment; sometimes it is weeks, months, or years after already going through with it.
And sometimes, it is right in the middle of the abortion itself.
For those undergoing a surgical abortion, there is sadly nothing that can be done to reverse it.
But for those undergoing a chemical abortion, there is something that can be done, and it has been proven to be highly effective in saving children’s lives.
Commonly referred to as “the abortion pill,” a chemical abortion is actually a two-drug combo. The first drug, mifepristone works by blocking a woman’s progesterone receptors, starving the unborn baby of the hormone needed to sustain a healthy pregnancy. The second drug, typically misoprostol, finishes the abortion, forcing the woman to deliver her deceased baby. This often occurs at home.
However, if a woman changes her mind and calls the 24/7 Abortion Pill Rescue Network helpline (877-558-0333) before taking the second drug, it may not be too late. When administered within 72 hours of taking mifepristone, the reversal protocol has a 68 percent success rate in saving unborn babies.
According to the Abortion Pill Rescue Network, the treatment has saved more than 2,000 babies from in-progress chemical abortions.
And that’s not just 2,000 lives. It’s more than 2,000 lifetimes. More than 2,000 mothers spared the profound regret of never holding their babies or watching them grow up. More than 2,000 family trees changed because of their brave choice.
And yet, despite the mounting evidence in favor of abortion pill reversal, abortion advocates continue to reject it as a viable reproductive choice for women in the throes of a pregnancy decision.
How horribly ironic.
For while we’ve always known the abortion lobby to be wholly unscientific, it is beyond clear now that they are also anti-choice.
Throughout the history of the modern abortion debate, abortion activists have hurled anti-choice charges against pro-lifers, insisting that we are the ones who want to curtail women’s “reproductive freedom.” But they are the ones who have targeted women’s choices, attacking, targeting, and smearing pro-life pregnancy help organizations and pushing a toxic narrative that says a woman must abort her child to be successful.
They have also obfuscated the truth about what occurs during an abortion and the innocent child on whom the abortion occurs.
For the last half century, they have outright lied about the basic biological reality of a preborn human child. They have glossed over the intricate development of these tiny human beings with overly-saccharine euphemisms and lazy, unscientific non-explanations of fetal development.
The abortion lobby has no real commitment to “science” and should therefore be disregarded on the issue entirely.
Even so, abortion advocates in Indiana insist that they are the arbiters of what is and isn’t “scientific.”
Following the passage of H.B. 1577 in the Indiana House, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Indiana and Kentucky slammed the bill as “‘junk science’ legislation, forcing doctors to lie to patients.”
This from the group that once tweeted, “Some men have a uterus” eleven times over.
But scores of medical practitioners have endorsed the abortion pill reversal treatment, signing on to be providers.
Today, about 1,000 medical providers offer abortion pill reversal through the Abortion Pill Rescue Network. Christina Francis, an Indiana OB-GYN, is one of them. During committee hearings on H.B. 1577, she provided expert testimony on the scientific reasoning that supports the use of progesterone in abortion pill reversal.
“Though abortion supporters claim that this is experimental, nothing could be further from the truth,” Francis said. “The reversal of mifepristone by progesterone, is consistent with a basic scientific principle that we all learned about in medical school, known as reversible competitive inhibition, and the reversibility of mifepristone by progesterone has been well-documented in several animal studies.”
Further, she says that the use of progesterone in early pregnancy is far from new.
“This is a medication with a long track record of safety in the first trimester of pregnancy,” she said. “It has been used for decades in early pregnancy for extra support by obstetricians, and in doses that have been previously used safely in pregnancy. This treatment protocol is now being used in multiple countries, and there are more than 2,000 children alive because of it. And 2,000 women that are able to build a lifetime of memories with their children, because they were able to choose this option.”
Abortion pill reversal is real. The women of Indiana deserve to know about it, and the unborn children of Indiana deserve to be rescued through it.