Baby Leo Saved Through Abortion Pill Reversal

In a heartwarming story, a mother named Amy told Pregnancy Help News how she saved the life of her now 5-month old son through abortion pill reversal.

“My first reaction to the pregnancy was thinking I didn’t want to have another kid,” Amy, 38, stated. “I told myself I didn’t want to take away from my two sons. I had built up anxiety, and on an impulse, I decided to get an abortion.”

Amy's two other sons are 16 and 14 years old. She had convinced herself that she was having an abortion for their sake, but she immediately felt regret after taking her first abortion pill.

“When I really took the time to think about it, I realized I had thought about everyone and everything else except this child and doing things God’s way,” said Amy. “God will always find a way to provide. Selfishness and ignorance were what led me.”

Amy searched the internet to find if there was anything she could do to prevent the abortion process that began when she took a dose of Mifepristone. She learned about abortion pill reversal and called the abortion pill reversal hotline. Workers from the Abortion Pill Rescue Network were able to find a doctor who was willing to help Amy on a Saturday morning. She obtained a prescription for progesterone, which can reverse the effects of the first abortion pill, and picked it up from her local Walgreens pharmacy.

“The people at Planned Parenthood offered zero support,” said Amy's husband, Tom. “Thank God, Amy went home, and she was determined to figure out how to reverse it.”

He had initially supported her idea to abort and had similar reasons, but he realized afterward that they were being impulsive.

“The stuff we were afraid of was all in our heads,” Tom said of the fear leading toward abortion. “Just stuff we conjured up.”

Leo's development was completely normal, and he is now a perfectly healthy 5-month old. He is just one of the many lives saved through abortion pill reversal. If anyone needs to contact the Abortion Pill Rescue Network, they can do so using the information on their website here.

Click here to read more of Amy's story.

Arkansas Abortionist Receives Emergency Suspension after Granting Minor a Medical Marijuana Card

Little Rock Family Planning abortionist and
owner Thomas Tvedten

Arkansas abortionist Thomas Tvedten of Little Rock Family Planning had his medical license suspended by the Arkansas State Medical Board after certified a young girl for a medical marijuana card.

The medical board came to the conclusion hat Tvedten's actions amounted to “gross negligence and ignorant malpractice.”

While it is unknown whether the minor was a patient of Tvedten, Operation Rescue President Troy Newman questioned whether the abortionist's actions had a more sinister motive: “the fact Tvedten was helping a little girl get marijuana raises disturbing questions about why he wanted that child drugged.”

He also noted that it is generally very difficult to convince a medical board that an abortionist's medical license should be suspended. The Operation Rescue president should know quite well what it takes to convince a medical board that an abortionist's license should be suspended or revoked. His organization constantly monitors abortion clinics for medical malpractice and advocates for the safety of vulnerable women who are harmed by abortionists.

More information about this specific incident will be available after an October 1 hearing.

To cover for Tvedten during his suspension, Little Rock Family Planning called on the infamous abortionist Willie Parker to serve as the abortion clinic's medical director for the time being. Parker was once idolized be pro-abortion advocates, but many distanced themselves from him after he was accused of predatory sexual behavior.

The clinic has seemingly replaced one irresponsible abortionist for another. Women and children (born and unborn) are not to be treated as commodities with price tags. They are people that deserve respect.

Click here to read more.

March for Life Announces New Theme for 2021: ‘Together Strong: Life Unites’

On September 10th, the March for Life Education & Defense Fund announced the theme and date for next year's March for Life event. The 47th annual March for Life will use the theme, “Together Strong: Life Unites” and be held in Washington D.C. on January 29th, 2021.

The event's organizers call the March for Life "the largest annual human rights demonstration in the world." Pro-life advocates from across the country come to Washington D.C. for the event each year to celebrate the sanctity of life and energize one another for the pro-life cause. This year's theme is meant to further unify pro-life advocates during this discouraging and divisive time.

At last year's event, President Donald Trump became the first sitting president to ever attend and speak at the March for Life. This year, regardless of the outcome of the election, pro-life advocates must remain vigilant. There is more work to be done. As the organizers affirm, there are things we can all do to defend the lives of the unborn:

"Each and every one of us has an important role to play in building a culture of life. As Mother Teresa once said, ‘You can do what I cannot do. I can do what you cannot do. Together we can do great things.’ From choosing adoption to joyfully accepting the responsibilities of fatherhood and motherhood. From sidewalk counseling to lobbying. From prenatal care to post-abortion support. From praying for the most vulnerable to voting to protect them."

Click here to read more.

NARAL Complains that Media Doesn't do Enough to Slant Coverage of the Abortion Debate

A new report by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) complains that news outlets don't use enough pro-abortion language when covering the topic of abortion.

The report, which even cited articles from left-leaning media sources such as CNN, the New York Times, and Politico, gave several flawed reasons in its argument.

Among its complaints are that news articles about abortion are more likely to quote politicians than doctors. They argue that this trend can cause people to believe that abortion is a political issue and not a healthcare one. NARAL would be right in this assessment. Abortion is not healthcare, and the killing of innocent people should be considered a political issue. It is an issue of human rights, and the protection of human rights is among the most basic duties of government.

The NARAL goes on to lament the use of terms such as "infanticide," "heartbeat bill," and "partial-birth abortion." Despite its own inability to refute the fact that unborn children have heartbeats after six weeks of development, the pro-abortion organization continues to claim that these terms are inaccurate when used to describe abortion. Instead, they argued, "only 27 articles [out of 91 analyzed] noted that [six weeks] is typically before a woman even knows she is pregnant — a critical fact that gives context to the potential impact on women." This "critical fact" should not matter if a human life with a beating heart is being traded for this "potential impact on women."

This is a blatant attempt to control American culture by controlling the language we use. Pro-life advocates need to be wary of efforts like this and reject changes to our language that would trick others into believing the lie that abortion is just another medical procedure.

Click here to read more.

Trump at Nevada Roundtable Claims Biden Supports “after-term abortion, which is basically baby execution."

photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

At a Hispanics for Trump roundtable event in Nevada, President Trump accused Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden of supporting “after-term abortion, which is basically baby execution."

While some news outlets point out that Biden's voting record on abortion used to be more moderate, Biden's stance on abortion has shifted dramatically throughout his political career. Originally a strong proponent of the Hyde Amendment, a policy that prevented federal tax dollars from funding elective abortions, he now advocates against the policy. Additionally, conservative pundits argue that more radical pro-abortion voices such as Alexandria-Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders are pulling candidate Joe Biden's policy agenda even further in support of abortion.

Biden's vice-presidential selection, California Senator Kamala Harris, voted against the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act earlier this year. The bill would have legally protected children who survive attempted abortions by creating criminal penalties for abortionists who don't provide them medical care after they are born.

While it might be somewhat unclear just how pro-abortion the Democratic presidential ticket is this election, it is blatantly obvious that the ticket unequivocally supports the practice of ending unborn lives.

Click here to read more.

Trump Administration Proposes Expansion to Mexico City Policy

photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

On Monday, the Trump administration proposed an expansion to the pro-life Mexico City Policy which would include military and government contracts.

The Mexico City Policy is not law, but it has been implemented by pro-life presidents since it was first implemented during President Ronald Reagan's administration in 1984. The current policy places limits on how US tax dollars can be distributed to Non-Governmental-Organizations (NGO's) in foreign countries. Specifically, it means that federal tax dollars may not be given to organizations that provide or promote abortion.

While the Mexico City Policy currently applies to nearly $9 billion in U.S. foreign aid, this expansion could further ensure that US funding is not being spent on organizations that will use it to promote the deadly practice of abortion. NGO's can do this by either directly committing abortions or by using US funds to subsidize lobbyists who fight for legalized or expanded abortion in their home countries.

In response, Planned Parenthood Action tweeted that the proposal is an “unprecedented expansion of a harmful policy.” That might be a sign that it's a good idea.

Click here to read more.

8th Circuit Court of Appeals Could End Injunctions Against 3 More Pro-Life Arkansas Laws

Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge
photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

Only a month after remanding injunctions against four pro-life Arkansas laws, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge’s request that it ends a separate injunction against three newer pro-life laws.

The three laws in question were passed in 2019 and blocked from enforcement by U.S. District Judge Kristine Baker on August 6, 2019.

The first of these is Act 493, which prohibits abortions after 18 weeks of pregnancy. This law would protect the most developed unborn children; ones that could survive birth if they were allowed to live just over a month longer.

The second is Act 619, which bans abortions “with the knowledge” that a woman is seeking it “solely on the basis” of a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome. This law would ban purely discriminatory abortions. A child's physical or mental abilities shouldn't determine its right to live.

The third is Act 700, which requires doctors who perform abortions in Arkansas to be board-certified or board-eligible OB-GYNs. Laws like this are passed in the hope that more qualified abortionists will at least have better regard for the safety of pregnant women who come to have abortions. All too often, stories come out about mothers who are hospitalized or killed by abortion providers. Pro-abortion advocates could not even allow a law like this to stay on the books, however.

Hopefully, Arkansas Attorney General Rutledge can successfully argue against the injunctions blocking these rightfully passed laws and save lives in the process.

Click here to read more.

New Illinois Billboard Campaign Advertises Medicaid-Funded Abortions

Illinois state capitol
photo credit: Jim Bowen / Flickr

The Chicago Abortion Fund started a new billboard campaign designed to promote taxpayer-funded abortions through Medicaid.

The pro-abortion organization has paid for six billboards statewide which read, “Abortion is Healthcare. It’s Covered by Illinois Medicaid. We’re Here to Help,” followed by the Chicago Abortion Fund’s website address. Three of the billboards are next to heavily-trafficked interstates near Chicago, two are in Peoria, and one is by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The signs are currently scheduled to remain posted through the month of September.

One of the billboards is pictured in an article by the Journal Standard. Click here to see.

Unlike most states, Illinois allows Medicaid funding to go directly toward elective abortion. Other states require Medicaid funding to adhere to the requirements of the Hyde Amendment, which prevents tax dollars from funding elective abortions. This taxpayer-funding caused a notable increase in abortion after its passage under former Governor Bruce Rauner in 2018.

Illinois lawmakers have made the deadly practice of abortion increasingly accessible to residents, and has gone as far as to make the state an "abortion hub" for anyone in the midwest seeking an abortion. As pro-life lawmakers in nearby states enact laws regulating abortion, more and more women come to Illinois from those states because the gruesome practice is almost completely unrestricted.

Click here to read more.

Tennessee State Representative Forced out of Democrat Party Due to Pro-Life Beliefs

Tennessee State Rep. John DeBerry Jr.
photo credit: Sean Braisted / Flickr

After being ejected from the Democrat party, ordained minister and pro-life Tennessee state Rep. John DeBerry Jr. will be running as an independent this year.

DeBerry was forcibly removed from the Democrat party after the Tennessee Democratic Party’s executive committee voted 41-18 to remove him from the August primary ballot. Luckily for him, legislators passed a measure which allowed him to be on the ballot for re-election even though he was unable to participate in the primaries. The Democrats removed DeBerry from their party after the filing deadline had passed to run as a Republican or independent, so he would have been unable to run at all even though he was currently an incumbent.

DeBerry, who serves as a minister for the Church of Christ, told the Catholic News Agency, “My work in Nashville as a legislator is nothing more than an extension of my work as a child of God, as a Christian,” he said. He added that it was ridiculous for the Democratic party to claim voters don't understand what he has been doing in office, or what his stance on abortion is. “So for them to say that folks don’t know where I stand, they actually said that the people in my district don’t have sense enough to elect their representative.”

CNA also wrote that DeBerry “was one of more than 100 Democrats at the federal, state, and local levels who recently asked the platform committee of the Democratic National Convention to moderate the abortion language in the party’s platform.”

Click here to read more.

President Trump Releases New List of 20 Potential Supreme Court Nominees

photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

At a white house press conference on September 9, President Donald Trump announced a new list of 20 people he would consider as potential Supreme Court nominees if a vacancy appears.

Among the names he listed are Texas Senator Ted Cruz, Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton, Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, and U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Pitlyk. All three senators take pro-life stances, and Pitlyk used to be part of The Center for Medical Progress's defense team after it was sued by Planned Parenthood for releasing videos exposing its sale of fetal tissue harvested from aborted children.

Senator Hawley has since stated that he is not interested in holding a position on the high court. He has stated that he would ask Supreme Court nominees if they believed Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided as a "litmus test" for whether he would accept them, however.

The full list of potential nominees can be found here in the transcript of the president's Wednesday press conference.

Pro-life organizations applauded the president's list of potential constitutional conservative nominees. Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser said it was "full of all-stars," and National Right to Life President Carol Tobias wrote,

“President Trump’s expanded list of potential Supreme Court justices is laden with an impressive assembly of well-qualified men and women who would make outstanding additions to the Supreme Court, and who have demonstrated a commitment to defending the text and history of the Constitution and the principles of judicial restraint. President Trump’s list stands in stark contrast with the judicial-legislation activists who would be nominated by Joe Biden.”

Click here to read more.

Assisted Suicide "Doctor" Says he Experiments on Patients to Find More Efficient Ways to Kill Them.

In response to a Mercury News article that celebrated the experimentation of an assisted suicide "doctor" trying to make the process of dying quicker, National Review Columnist Wesley Smith wrote an article criticizing the media for lifting up doctors like Lonnie Shavelson.

The Mercury News article was titled “How California Doctors are Fixing How We Die” and included quotes from Shavelson, who said that he is actively changing the drug cocktails he gives to patients who wish to die. His goal is to make the process faster so they don't suffer for hours after taking the poison he prescribes them, but his action amount to human experimentation.

Smith hits the nail on the head with his analysis of the situation, writing, "Let’s label this what it is: Shavelson using sick suicidal people as human guinea pigs in being made dead".

Not only will death doctors take advantage of sick and depressed individuals for a profit (Shavelson himself charges $2,000 for his services), but they will use these people as test subjects for their newest ways to kill people.

Every human being has value, and no doctor should reinforce the idea that disability or depression makes someone disposable.

Click here to read more.

Church in Washington State Asks 9th Circuit to Overturn Ruling Forcing it to Cover Elective Abortion

Cedar Park Assembly of God, a church in the state of Washington, filed its opening brief with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday. A lower court already dismissed the church's lawsuit against the state for forcing the church's health insurance plan to cover elective abortion, but the church hopes that the 9th circuit will overrule that decision.

The church's opening brief explains that  SB 6219 (the law forcing insurance providers to cover abortions), “contains no religious exception despite many religious organizations’ belief in the sanctity of human life and strong opposition to abortion. When churches protested, the bill’s sponsor suggested they sue if they did not wish to comply. This extreme abortion-coverage mandate had its desired effect: insurance providers began inserting abortion coverage into ministries’ health plans in direct violation of their religious teachings…. State officials thus deliberately targeted houses of worship for mandatory abortion coverage and, in so doing, intentionally violated their religious beliefs about the sanctity of human life.”

SB 6219 was signed into law back in March of 2018 and threatens criminal penalties if an organization refuses to provide abortion coverage as part of its maternity care.

“No church should be forced to cover abortions, and certainly not a church that dedicates its ministry to protecting and celebrating life like Cedar Park does,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Legal Counsel Elissa Graves. “Cedar Park believes and teaches that every human life begins at conception and is worthy of protection until natural death, so providing insurance coverage for abortions is clearly not something the church can or should be forced to do. And Cedar Park doesn’t simply believe in the importance of human life, it puts those beliefs into practice by partnering with a local pregnancy care center, hosting an annual camp for foster care children, and ministering to hundreds of couples struggling with infertility. The state has no legitimate legal basis to force this church—or any other—into contradicting its foundational belief that human life is sacred.”

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys are assisting Cedar Park Assembly of God in its argument to the 9th circuit.

Click here to read more.

Exposed University of New Mexico Logs Show Gruesome Details of Fetal Tissue Harvesting

photo credit: Andrew Malone / Flickr

A gruesomely detailed set of logs from the University of New Mexico was recently released by the pro-life group Abortion on Trial. The logs describe baby body parts obtained by the university through its partnership with the abortion business, Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO).

SWO provided the body parts to UNM for the sake of scientific research, and the logs show specifically what body parts researchers were able to dissect from each abortion victim. In addition, notes following some of these entries show the flippant attitude with which researchers regard each child; completely ignoring their humanity.

The notes show researchers' excitement or disappointment at the level of development a child reached before being harvested. In one instance, a researcher was clearly excited they were able to obtain a completely developed pancreas. When writing the log, the researcher wrote that they collected an “ENTIRE PANCREAS — whoo hoo!!!” In another instance, a researcher drew a frowning face after noting that a child's stomach was broken and no pancreas was obtainable.

In one incredibly disturbing case, an intact brain harvested from a 24-28 week old preborn child was planned to be dissected at a high school summer camp.

Click here to read more.

Media Refuses to Run Ad for Class Action Lawsuit Against Planned Parenthood

Screenshot from Thomas More Society ad

The pro-life Thomas More Society produced two video advertisements seeking California women who were deceived by Planned Parenthood into believing their aborted children's tissue was being donated when it was actually being sold. The organization is putting together a class-action lawsuit against the abortion giant, and it originally planned on airing the ad on every major television network in the state of California, but each and every local affiliate has refused to let the Thomas More Society purchase an ad slot.

The class-action lawsuit is a response to the Center for Medical Progress's viral videos which came out in 2015. They featured clips from undercover conversations pro-life investigators (posing as potential buyers of fetal tissue) had with Planned Parenthood officials. The Center for Medical Progress exposed that Planned Parenthood was selling tissue from aborted children against federal laws, but Planned Parenthood has yet to face any legal repercussions for its actions. Instead, the investigators are being prosecuted for allegedly breaking California privacy laws.

In response to local affiliates refusing to show the advertisements, Thomas More Society Special Counsel Paul Jonna said, “The facts contained in these short little video clips have been corroborated by reports from Congress, the select investigation panel, and the Senate Judiciary Committee. We’re not just making stuff up – these are facts documented in the public record already. These companies actually asked for further information, and they still refused to air [the] [ads].” 

The streaming services Hulu, Pandora, and Premion also refused to air the advertisements normally. Hulu refused outright, Pandora requested that mentions of Planned Parenthood be removed, and Premion said it would only air the advertisements outside of primetime hours.

Click here to read more.

Study Finds Mothers who Abort First Child are More Likely to Abort Future Pregnancies.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, a new study published in the Journal of Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology finds that women who abort their first child are more likely to abort future children.

The study analyzed the outcomes of 7.3 million pregnancies of women eligible for Medicaid who were over the age of 13 between the years of 1999 and 2014. The pregnancies analyzed were in 17 states which allow state taxes to fund abortions.

The study found that women who abort their first pregnancy are more likely to have abortions during their next pregnancy than women who give birth to their first pregnancy or experience a miscarriage. The study also found that the likelihood that a woman will have an abortion during their next pregnancy increases with each subsequent abortion they have. The study noted that this trend was particularly prominent among black mothers who aborted their first children.

The authors wrote, “low-income women who have abortions are more likely to have more overall pregnancies, including more subsequent abortions, [and this] would tend to support the body of evidence indicating that abortion is associated with greater subsequent reproductive health risks.”

The researchers also wrote, “The hope that easier access to abortion would decrease maternal mortality has been rebutted by evidence to the contrary.”

Click here to read more.

4th Circuit Blocks Enforcement of Title X "Protect Life Rule" in Maryland

On Thursday last week, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the Trump administration's "Protect Life Rule." The rule requires recipients of Title X funding to not provide abortion, refer patients to abortion providers, or co-locate with organizations that provide abortions. The ruling, which conflicts with a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, means that Maryland is now the only state that does not have to conform to the Trump administration's rule.

In an 8-6 decision, the court upheld an April decision denying a Trump administration motion to stay an injunction against the rule.

Judge Stephanie Thacker wrote for the majority, saying the administration, “failed to recognize and address the ethical concerns of literally every major medical organization in the country, and it arbitrarily estimated the cost” associated with the new regulations.

“Moreover, considering the time-sensitive nature of pregnancy and access to legal abortion, this attempt to hoodwink patients creates ‘unreasonable barriers’ to ‘appropriate medical care,’ and ‘impedes timely access’ to health care services.”

Due to the conflicting rulings from the 4th and 9th circuits, a resolution from the Supreme Court is likely.

Click here to read more.

Trump Campaign says Administration would 'fully defund' Planned Parenthood in a Second Term

President Donald Trump
photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

In a letter to pro-life supporters, President Donald Trump promised he would work to fully defund the abortion industry if he is re-elected.

After touting his administration's pro-life efforts, the letter gave several bullet points outlining how he would continue to fight for unborn children in a second term. These claims list that he would: “continue nominating constitutionalist Supreme Court and lower court judges”; “protect unborn life through every means available”; and “defend the freedoms of religious believers and organizations.”

Earlier this week, the Trump administration received criticism from pro-life advocates after his campaign released a document listing Trump's priorities for a second term. The document did not include anything about protecting unborn children from abortion or defunding abortion clinics like Planned Parenthood. After receiving criticism, the campaign quietly added pro-life points to the president's goals over the weekend.

Click here to read more.

Alabama Abortion Clinic Under Criminal Investigation After Patient Dies

Photo credit: Operation Rescue

Operation Rescue reported last month that a woman who visited the West Alabama Women’s Center abortion facility in Tuscaloosa, Alabama died on May 7 after visiting an abortion clinic. Now, the organization has learned that the clinic is currently under criminal investigation for this death.

Pro-life advocates reached out to the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences (ADFS) to learn more about the details of the woman's death, which they believed would be public record. The ADFS surprised them with its response:

“District Attorney Hays Webb has notified the Alabama Department of Forensic Science that this case remains under criminal investigation. . . Consequently, the final reports in this case are not currently public record.”

Pro-life advocates saw the woman exiting West Alabama Women's Center on the day of her death. According to those bystanders, she seemed sickly pale and needed to be supported by a clinic worker while she walked to a car.

Fr. Terry Gensemer, the Director of the Charismatic Episcopal Church For Life, commented, “We are glad to discover that at least one state agency seems to be looking into this woman’s death. Perhaps the Department of Public Health can take a cue from the District Attorney and finally look into whether or not this abortion clinic followed proper protocol in the incident, as well as explain to citizens why a new owner is being allowed a pass on applying for a new license, which their own regulations clearly require.”

Click here to read more.

Pro-Abortion Groups Sue Tennessee to Block Patients from Learning About Abortion Pill Reversal

Tennessee State Capitol
photo credit: Matt Turner / Flickr

Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) all sued the state of Tennessee on Monday over a law that requires women seeking abortion pills to hear about abortion pill reversal.

Other parts of the omnibus law have already hit legal roadblocks, including a fetal heartbeat provision, but now the abortion lobby has taken aim at a provision that simply informs women that they have a chance to take back their decisions o abort if they have second thoughts.

Specifically, the law requires businesses dispensing abortion pills to inform women about abortion pill reversal in-person or over the phone (depending on how the pills were dispensed). Those who fail to do so would receive heavy fines and felony charges.

The abortion lawsuit claims that the law violates abortion providers' First Amendment rights by requiring them to “communicate a content-based, viewpoint-based, and/or controversial government-mandated message that they would not otherwise recite concerning an experimental medical treatment that has not been shown to be safe or effective.”

In reality, abortion pill reversal is a proven and simple treatment that has saved over 1,000 children since 2007. The first pill in the abortion pill regimen, mifepristone, blocks a pregnant mother's natural flow of a chemical called progesterone. By doing so, a mother's body no longer properly provides nutrients and oxygen to her child. Abortion pill reversal simply has a woman take additional progesterone so that the flow of nutrients is restored. Progesterone has even been used by pregnant mothers who haven't taken the abortion pill to help them with other pregnancy-related problems. If done within 24 hours of taking mifepristone, abortion pill reversal can have a good chance of saving a child's life.

Click here to read more.

20 Senators Call on FDA to Ban Abortion Pill

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

On Tuesday, 20 Senators led by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) sent a letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asking it to classify the abortion pill mifepristone as dangerous and remove it from the market.

The letter, sent to FDA commissioner Stephen Hahn, reads:

“[G]iven the devastating impact this drug has had on American women and children, we must now urge the FDA to exercise its authority … and classify the abortion pill as an ‘imminent hazard to the public health’ that poses a ‘significant threat of danger’ and remove this pill from the U.S. market,”

The abortion pill was subject to the FDA's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions until recently, when a federal judge halted the restrictions. The reasoning for the sudden ruling was that women may be unable to get elective procedures such as abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The judge believed that the REMS restrictions became a burden on abortion access when coupled with the circumstances of the virus, so they have been suspended for the duration of the pandemic.

The senators' letter responds to this situation:

“We believe that this rogue judicial activism is a gross breach of the separation of powers, undermining the FDA’s statutory authority to ensure drug safety, while recklessly endangering American women and children. The FDA must resist this opportunistic ploy to expand access to abortion under the fallacy that the REMS imposes an undue burden on women’s rights.”

The abortion pill regimen is a two-step process in which a pregnant mother first starves a child to death by taking mifepristone. After the child is dead, the woman then takes misoprostol to begin contractions and expel the deceased child from their body. This is often done at home without any medical supervision, and it can be extremely dangerous if the woman had undiagnosed pregnancy conditions such as ectopic pregnancy.

“[I]t is by now nakedly obvious that the abortion industry and its allies in the media, billionaire philanthropic circles, and special interest groups, have wanted an unregulated and demedicalized abortion pill since the moment the FDA first approved it in 2000,” the letter continues. “… We believe this deadly pill should never have been approved, yet the abortion industry was politically rewarded with an accelerated approval process normally reserved for high-risk drugs that address life-threatening illnesses like AIDS. As you are surely aware, pregnancy is not a life-threatening illness, and the abortion pill does not cure or prevent any disease.”

U.S. House, Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.) leads a group of 72 representatives in sending a similar letter to the FDA.

Click here to read more.