+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005

    FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Twelve women have died worldwide so far from this drug but this number may be low given the reluctance of abortion clinics to accurately report medical problems associated with the killing of unborn children.

    Please ask congress to pass "Holly's Law" (see below).

    I feel strongly that I am referencing a credible source. Don't let a bias kick in for you right away by seeing the source referenced- don't let that stop you from getting this info. and taking action, if you want. I am not trying to "further my agenda" or anything like that- so critics, (I know u r out there) your criticism and barbs won't help at all. I have my beliefs- and u r entitled to yours!!!

    Dead Women: Are They Collateral Damage In War On Unborn Babies?
    By Rev. Louis P. Sheldon
    Chairman, Traditional Values Coalition
    March 21, 2006

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has just announced that two more deaths of women are attributable to complications from using the abortion drug, RU-486. This brings the total to six women in the U.S. and at least three overseas. There have been more than 800 complications that have been reported to the FDA since the drug was legalized in the U.S.

    The most serious complications have included: 42 women who experienced life-threatening hemorrhages; 68 women who had severe hemorrhages requiring blood transfusions; 66 cases of infection; and at least 513 who women required surgery. The FDA says it is investigating these latest deaths from RU-486 but is not removing the abortion drug from the market.

    But that’s not enough. Congress must pass “Holly’s Law,” (H.R. 1079) sponsored by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD). Congressman Bartlett speaks with authority on the impact that drugs have on the human body. He has a Ph.D. in human physiology, has served as a professor at two medical schools and has conducted research at the National Institutes of Health.

    After learning of the deaths of two more women from RU-486, Rep. Bartlett asked: “How many more women must die or be injured before Congress acts to protect American women’s lives and health from ... a timid FDA?” Americans should be asking this question of their federal legislators.

    “Holly’s Law” is named after Holly Patterson, an 18-year-old California girl who died on September 7, 2003 after taking RU-486 at a Planned Parenthood center. Planned Parenthood failed to show her how to administer the drug; did not have her signature on a consent form; and failed to report her death as an unusual occurrence.

    Holly Patterson’s parents described their anguish over what happened to their daughter in an open letter published on November 6, 2003. In it, they noted: “As parents, we cannot allow our beautiful daughter Holly’s horrible death to be in vain. RU-486 has caused serious injury and has been implicated in the deaths of other young women. Now it has killed our daughter. We have learned that the initial trials were rushed and the drug was lumped in and approved with drugs designed for life threatening illnesses such as cancer and AIDS.”

    Holly’s parents have wholeheartedly endorsed “Holly’s Law” because they fear that other women will die from this dangerous drug.

    If passed, “Holly’s Law” will require the FDA to temporarily withdraw its approval of the abortion drug from the market until a thorough review is conducted to determine if the FDA followed appropriate policies in the process of approving RU-486. There were numerous irregularities in how the FDA handled the approval of RU-486 during the Clinton Administration.

    Susan E. Wills, Associate Director of Education at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities listed these irregularities in an editorial published in the Washington Times on February 5, 2006.

    She notes that the FDA failed in at least four areas of testing: 1. It abandoned its drug approval standard requiring two randomized, blind, controlled clinical trials; 2. It used a “fast-track” approval process used only for drugs needed to treat life-threatening illnesses; 3. RU-486 taken alone is dangerous. A second drug, Misoprostol, is also needed to expel the dead baby, but the manufacturer of Misoprostol warned against using this drug for abortion. The FDA approved Misoprostol without any drug application being filed; 4. The FDA prescribed regimen using RU-486 and Misoprostol “lacked safeguards present in clinical trials...”

    According to Wills, “FDA reluctance to suspend the drug temporarily is puzzling. .... Rather than killing ‘the drug,’ the FDA’s flawed approval and subsequent inaction is killing children and their mothers. Congress must put a stop to this.”

    Congress must do the right thing and pass “Holly’s Law” to thoroughly investigate why the FDA gave this abortion drug such special treatment during the scandal-ridden Clinton era. Perhaps the Clinton-run FDA and Planned Parenthood believed at the time that the deaths of a few women were simply collateral damage in the war on the unborn.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Of course, what this right-wing propaganda piece doesn't mention is that in ALL the reported cases mentioned above, the death was due to failure to take to drug according to instructions. Just like any medication, if you don't follow the dosing instructions, you could die...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    How dare you - that is pretty much untrue! Before you spew out half-truths, especially on something of such serious nature, get the FACTS! If a woman DID succumb because of improper dosage instructions, then those that administered it shouldn't administer such a serious poison.

    Even if what you wrote held any water- which it DOES NOT- there is no excuse for drugs to cause such damage!

    THIS FROM OCTOBER 2005 (Yes, I am feeling the human emotion of anger right now!)

    RU 486 Has Killed Ten Women

    by J.C. Willke, MD

    Since it has become generally used in the western world, the French abortion pill, RU 486, has now resulted in the death of seven women. This fact speaks for itself in regard to the so-called safety of the drug. Let me briefly describe each victim.

    1. The first published case occurred in France, April 1991, but was widely dismissed because it was reported she had all three contraindications to the use of the drug. She had been a heavy smoker, had heart problems and high blood pressure. Over the next several years, there were no deaths reported, possibly because the drug was only beginning to be introduced in many countries.

    2. In September 2001, a Canadian woman died from septic shock eight days after taking the pills. This was a result of a Clostridium infection in the uterus, possibly due to retained parts of the baby. A second woman, 21 years old, sustained a serious heart attack but survived. As a result, the Canadian trials of RU 486 were temporarily halted.

    3. On September 12, 2001, a 38- year-old woman in Tennessee died five days after taking RU 486. She had a tubal pregnancy which, according to a warning from the Food and Drug Administration, RU 486 will not abort. This abortion facility apparently failed to make the proper diagnosis, even though they did an ultrasound. According to her boyfriend, they said, “We don’t see any fetus in the uterus, but that is not unusual. This is an early pregnancy.” She returned home and developed severe pain and bleeding, which worsened over several days. She placed multiple calls to the abortion facility, as her condition worsened, but was advised that her symptoms were normal and routine. She was finally hospitalized and received legitimate medical care, but died from massive peritonitis from the ruptured tube. A major malpractice lawsuit was subsequently filed.

    4. Holly Patterson, an 18-year-old girl in California, died September 17, 2003, after taking RU 486. The Planned Parenthood death center did not educate her on how to administer the medication, did not have her signature on a consent form and failed to report her death as an unusual occurrence. After taking the medication, she returned to a local hospital twice. The first time she was given painkillers and sent home. The second time, she went to the hospital where she died. The Alameda County, California Coroner’s official autopsy report stated that she died because the drugs did not produce a complete abortion. The retained parts developed a massive systemic infection, septic shock and resulted in death.

    5. Rebecca Tell Berg, a sixteen-year- old Swedish girl, died June 3, 2003 from an RU 486 abortion. In this case, she apparently received good medical care. She was seven weeks pregnant. One week after being examined by a gynecologist, she returned to the hospital and was given three RU 486 abortion pills, a full dose. Two days later she returned and was given two Cytotec pills. After a few hours, she was in severe pain, bleeding heavily and was given pain medication. After being kept in the hospital for eight hours, she passed a “big blob” and was sent home. Days later, still bleeding and in pain, her boyfriend encouraged her to go to the hospital. However, hospital officials told her she could bleed for as long as two weeks, so she stayed home. During this time, a medical professional, inquiring about her condition, made at least one phone call. Eight days after the abortion she was found dead in the shower. A coroner’s report confirmed that Rebecca bled to death. It noted, however, that the doctors had given an appropriate dosage, followed proper procedure and “followed all the rules.”

    6,7. The British government, in January 2004, announced that two women had died after taking RU 486 for abortions. No details of the deaths or the victims have been given except that they died after taking RU 486. The deaths were described as “suspected fatal reactions associated with the use of RU 486.” When questioned, the health minister noted there might have been other causes for the deaths, but provided no evidence other than the use of RU 486.

    8. In November 2004 the US Food and Drug Administration announced that another woman had died from taking RU 486. The FDA said that they had reports of 17 potentially fatal cases of tubal pregnancy that had taken the drug. They noted that heavy bleeding was a problem in 8%, lasting as long as thirty days. They have records of 72 cases needing blood transfusions. They also reported seven near fatal cases of severe sepsis (bacterial infections), which were treated successfully. Rather than take this dangerous drug off the market, which is what they would have done if this had been any other drug except an abortion drug, they have compromised by issuing a revised warning label detailing these potential serious problems.

    9. One of these women was Oriane Shevin, 34 from Sherman Oaks, California. She died June 14, 2005 an attorney and mother of two, the cause of death was sepsis, a blood infection.

    10. Hoa Thuy Tran, 21, a student teacher in Orange County, CA died in 2003. Her name was made public in October 2005 when her family filed a lawsuit against Danco and Planned Parenthood, the maker of RU 486. Her death was due to septic shock associated with the drug.

    On July 29, 2005, the US Food and Drug Administration confirmed that a total of five women in the US have died using the drug RU486. Note that we list three deaths above. This adds two more.

    Concerned Women for America, a pro-life women’s group under the Freedom of Information Act, receive public documents from the FDA. These list over 600 adverse effects by women taking this drug. These included 220 cases of hemorrhage that were either life threatening or extremely serious, 71 of which required blood transfusions. In addition, 392 reports indicated women requiring surgery to repair damage resulting from the abortion including many under emergency conditions. As a result of this, many havepetitioned the FDA to remove this dangerous drug from the market before more women die.

    Short of death, the most serious concern is bleeding. Women who take RU 486 usually bleed for one or two weeks, with 10% bleeding more than one month. This leaves women exposed to infection for an extended period of time. The average woman loses four times the average blood from a standard surgical abortion. In European trials, at least one in every hundred women had to be hospitalized due to blood loss and needed a transfusion. One case illustrating this occurred during the official trials of RU 486 in the United States. A woman in Iowa almost died from hemorrhage from an incomplete RU 486 abortion. Multiple emergency blood transfusions saved her life. (This according to Dr. M. Loviere, Waterloo Courier, 9-24-95.)

    Much more detail could be given to the problems resulting from the use of this chemical abortion, including fetal deformity in babies delivered after failed use of these drugs. As a close observer of this issue from its beginning, I felt it was time to document these deaths and tell the world this is not a safe drug.

    October 2005

    Life Issues Institute, Inc
    1821 W. Galbraith Rd.
    Cincinnati, OH 45239

    Phone: 513.729.3600
    Email: [email protected]
    Last edited by boone; 03-23-2006 at 08:48 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Quote Originally Posted by boone
    Twelve women have died worldwide so far from this drug but this number may be low given the reluctance of abortion clinics to accurately report medical problems associated with the killing of unborn children.

    Please ask congress to pass "Holly's Law" (see below).

    I feel strongly that I am referencing a credible source. Don't let a bias kick in for you right away by seeing the source referenced- don't let that stop you from getting this info. and taking action, if you want. I am not trying to "further my agenda" or anything like that- so critics, (I know u r out there) your criticism and barbs won't help at all. I have my beliefs- and u r entitled to yours!!!

    Hi Boone,

    The information you have posted here is:

    1). Troubling
    2). Painful to read, and it is hard not get emotional.

    However, the information proves there needs to be stiff regulations, constant medical, health and safety oversight. The information also proves, this procedure must be administered by a medical doctor, in a hospital setting.

    Because of deaths resulting from RU486, not doing further study, testing, and trials will not more stop deaths. It will assure more injuries, deaths, and permanent disability to many women, here and around the world.

    ALL medications, supplements, medical procedures, and anything affecting the body's functioning, anything compromising the integrity of the body, is capable of causing serious s and sometimes, fatal reactions.

    It is unfortunately the nature of working on such a complicated, temperamental creation, as the human body. ;) I am not being flippant or sarcastic. Any medical doctor worth their salt, will admit, anything done to the human body can cause damage, and even death. Good doctors know they have to keep learning throughout their careers, because there is so much not known about the body.

    I have a scientific turn of mind, so the stopping of research does not help anyone, in the long run. I am not trying to further "my agenda" in responding to this thread, I just think we all must think calmly, and rationally.

    DeeDee1965 :)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Just a question.....
    "In the past decade, over 1 million women worldwide have safely used RU486 to end their pregnancies. It is now approved for use in more than 29 countries, including the U.S. and most European countries. Mifeprex has been chosen by nearly 200,00 women in the U.S."
    It seems that this drug is a lot safer than some other drugs that are widely available on the market. And if you use any drug incorrectly you can surely die. So, to my question.... Do you think this campaign has more to do with the risks of taking medication, or what the pill is designed for?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Hi DeeDee and Username: Yes, it is troubling and painful to read. I have so many thoughts on the topic, and am having a hard time gathering my thoughts...let's see if I can make some sense. Thanks for your input on this.

    Dear Username: Good question...I honestly think it is both, and personally I think both issues are of dire importance anyway.

    As for it being safe, well, so it seems, you think so, anyway...well, I have my doubts and am wondering where you referenced the "1 million women safely used it" quote...sorry that I am skeptical...sure, there is a lot of info. available- I am bent on being able to research things, and want my info. from credible sources. There are many women who suffer emotionally from terminating pregnancies- that is a concern of mine- not only the physical harm that can result. Also, there is a correlation between women who have had abortion(s) and also have kids- some are more apt to abuse their kids.

    I guess I am resentful of the fact that some people are for "saving the whales" and "end animal cruelty" and "don't buy fur" (another topic- and I agree to these to some extent- but that is for another day), but when it comes to the sanctity of human life and killing babies, they do a 180(?) :confused:

    Here is some more info., and the FDA's page is at

    (The FDA page won't load for me right now- I had it up earlier to view, and now it is stuck; I will post a copy of it later, if/when it loads.)

    RU-486; What You Don't Know Can Kill You

    It sounds so easy ... take a pill and you abort.

    Easy, safe and cheap, and it benefits women.
    This is how RU-486, known as the abortion pill, is being described. Yet, this is an issue of life and death. You must look beyond the words to find the truth.

    Easy ... When a woman takes RU-486 she experiences severe cramping, nausea, vomiting and bleeding. Lester Hyman, a spokesman for the manufacturer of RU-486, Roussel-Uclaf, admitted “there is considerable pain with the procedure.” The emotional distress, however, may have even more impact. Rather than being “over with” in a few minutes (as in a surgical abortion) this abortion could last for over a week. When the woman finally does abort, she will expel a tiny dead human being - her baby. There will be no denying what is really aborted! Edouard Sakiz, the former president of Roussel-Uclaf admits that RU-486 abortions involve “an appalling psychological ordeal.” So much for “easy”.
    Safe ... In July 1996, an FDA advisory panel heard the testimony of Dr. Mark Louviere, telling of his experience treating a woman who had taken RU-486 for an abortion. She had lost 1/2 to 2/3 of her blood. She is just one of an estimated 15,000 to 30,000 women a year who will suffer complications from this drug. This is based on the anticipated rate of complications by The Population Council, who hold the patent for RU-486. They anticipate a 1% to 2% complication rate, including cardiac arrest, hemorrhage, and incomplete abortions. If this figure is projected on the 1.5 million abortions done in this country each year, that percentage represents an alarming number of women suffering complications every year. “Safe” is dangerous for women.

    Cheap ... In Europe, where RU-486 abortions are common, the costs are the same as surgical abortions because they require more staff, careful monitoring and three or more visits to the clinic or hospital. Add to this the complication that one in 10 women fail to abort and must undergo a surgical abortion anyway. “Cheap” just became very expensive!

    Benefits women ... RU-486 is not about benefiting women. It’s about population control. The manufacturer, Roussel Uclaf, was very hesitant to apply for FDA approval. They knew this drug created health complications that could lead to expensive lawsuits. Then the Clinton administration, because of their commitment to control of world population, stepped in to help get RU-486 approved. Unable to convince Roussel Uclaf to begin FDA approval proceedings, a deal was negotiated where Roussel Uclaf would donate the patent for RU-486 to The Population Council. It was further negotiated that RU-486 would be able to attain FDA approval with only $8 million in drug testing trials instead of the normal $100 million or more. RU-486 was “fast tracked” through the testing process. Most drugs go through rigorous and lengthy testing by the FDA before gaining approval to be prescribed to the general public.
    Instead of six years or more, which is typical for most drugs, the length of testing for RU-486 was reduced to six months. Why the corner cutting and big push to get this abortion drug into use?

    RU-486 is an easy way to “export” abortions to third world countries where abortions are not legal. When a drug has FDA approval, third world countries rely on this approval as an assurance that it is safe for their population. What is good for America surely must be good for them, they reason. The reality is, RU-486 will be used in third world countries as an easy to administer method of abortion. Many of these third world countries do not allow abortion because of religious or cultural restrictions. Unlike a surgical abortion, RU-486 could be easily administered without a woman’s understanding or consent. Does this sound far fetched?

    A documentary entitled The Human Laboratory, aired by British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) exposed how population controllers had tested Norplant birth control inserts in a similar manner on the women of Bangladesh without telling them the risks or possible side effects. Since then, Norplant has proven to be dangerous, and in some cases deadly, when used. American women experienced the same problems Bangladeshi women did. Now, in America, women are suing Norplant manufacturers in several class-action suits. The Bangladeshi women have no such system of justice.

    The same BBC documentary reported that women in the Philippines and Mexico have also been used unknowing as guinea pigs for a new experimental pregnancy vaccine. According to human rights activists, it has been administered, without the consent or knowledge of female patients, as a “piggyback” vaccine in a series of tetanus vaccine programs. The women became suspicious when they noticed that those women who had received the “tetanus vaccine” were miscarrying at an unusually high rate. The lab tests confirmed that the “tetanus vaccine” had indeed been “laced” with HCG vaccine, which prevents women from carrying their pregnancies to term.

    In reality, American women taking RU-486 will be just as much “guinea pigs” as women from the third world countries. Their health and life will be put at risk for a drug that has not been thoroughly tested, has been “fast tracked” through the FDA approval process and is known to bring about life threatening complications. American women are being used as a “springboard” to get this abortion drug into developing countries where it can be easily administered without a woman’s informed consent.

    RU-486 is not easy, safe or cheap. Nor is it something that will benefit women. But it is being promoted this way because this drug comes with its own agenda. It is the “answer” for population controllers and abortion advocates. The question is, how high a price will women be forced to pay in physical complications and emotional devastation?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Quote Originally Posted by boone
    Dear Username: Good question...I honestly think it is both, and personally I think both issues are of dire importance anyway.
    As for it being safe, well, so it seems, you think so, anyway...well, I have my doubts and am wondering where you referenced the "1 million women safely used it" quote...sorry that I am skeptical...
    About 1/3 down the page...
    On the second paragraph....
    Sorry I didn't post the link, it's so readily available I thought you would know this already.

    Quote Originally Posted by boone
    Also, there is a correlation between women who have had abortion(s) and also have kids- some are more apt to abuse their kids.
    I've never heard of such a thing. Could you point me to your source?

    Quote Originally Posted by boone
    .... and killing babies, they do a 180(?) :confused:
    Killing babies is illegal. I know of no country that allows infanticide.
    Quote Originally Posted by boone
    The question is, how high a price will women be forced to pay in physical complications and emotional devastation?
    Women should not be forced to pay a price of any kind. They are big people, adults. They should be treated as such, as you and I would want to be treated.

    What I'm getting at is that if the drug is unsafe then I agree with you wholeheartedly, get it off the shelf. But if the anti-choice movement is involved you can rest assured there is a hidden agenda... they don't like the pill for what is does. And that's where I have a problem. There have been 12 unfortunate incidents with RU-486, but the anti-choice movement is much more dangerous. Among other acts, in the past year there has been an attempted firebombing at a Louisiana clinic and one incident of arson in Florida. In the past decade approximately two murders, one attempted murder, two bombings, 18 incidents of arson, 298 acts of vandalism, 642 anthrax threats, 121 bomb threats, and 27 blockades have occurred at clinics. Since 1993, three doctors, two clinic employees, a clinic escort, and a security guard have been murdered. In addition to these seven murders, 17 attempted murders have also occurred since 1991.

    I would love to see a time when there are no abortions, and hopefully that time will come. I just don't think half the population should be allowed to take away the rights of the other half. It just sorta flies in the face of Democracy, doesn't it? Your way, making abortions illegal, subjugating women and restricting their access to medical technology will not eliminate abortions. It will merely move it back into hiding where many, many more women will die. Only through education, understanding, and help from you and me will abortions go away.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Well, I am not in a frame of mind at this time to address this whole-heartedly, but I will come out of my passive mode a little to give some response...I will address this more very soon- just kind of burnt out after the day I have had...I am mostly in "wanna read" mode right now...thanks for the replies thus far. Maybe the weight of this matter is a factor.

    When a being is growing, that means it is alive...also, like my grampa told me once, and he was a wise old bird: anybody that is for abortion can easily pick that choice, because their mother did not abort them.

    There are those that disagree- that's fine and dandy that other people have their own point of view. And I am no expert, just want to seek the truth, know the truth, and live it.


    Springfield, IL (LifeNews.com) -- For decades, evidence has existed showing abortion contributes to a rise in child abuse. Now a new study by a post-abortion research institute and Bowling Green State University professors finds that women who have abortions are more likely to abuse their children.
    Published in the medical journal Acta Paediatrica, the study found that women who have had abortions are 2.4 times more likely to physically abuse their children. Pro-life advocates say it proves the need for providing women with post-abortion counseling to help deal with the emotional trauma of the abortion.

    Led by Priscilla Coleman, a professor at Bowling Green, researchers looked at data taken from a survey of 518 low-income women in Baltimore who were receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children and who had at least one child aged 12 years or younger.

    The data compared rates of child abuse and neglect among women who had experienced either an involuntary (miscarriage or stillbirth) or voluntary (induced abortion) pregnancy loss.

    Women who had a miscarriage or stillbirth were more likely to physically abuse their children as well, but the increase was much less significant than for women who had abortions.

    The authors suggested that "emotional difficulties and unresolved grief responses" from pregnancy loss, whether voluntary or involuntary, could have a negative impact on women's mental health and lead to unhealthy parenting responses.

    According to the Illinois-based Elliot Institute, which released information about the study's findings, prior surveys "have linked pregnancy loss to an increase in grief reactions, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, all of which can have a negative impact on parent/child relationships."

    The post-abortion research group also points to a 2002 study published in the Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology that found abortion has been linked to an increase in substance abuse and thoughts of suicide, which could also contribute to child abuse.

    The new study also found that women who had more than one miscarriage or stillbirth were more likely to engage in child abuse than women who had just one. However, women who had abortions were more likely to abuse their children whether they had one or more than one abortion.

    "Regardless of the specific mechanisms at play, maternal history of one induced abortion does appear to be a marker for increased risk of physical abuse," the authors concluded.

    According to Elliot Institute director Dr. David Reardon, who has worked on more than a dozen published studies documenting abortion's negative impact on women, many women either feel a need to keep the abortion a secret or are told to simply "move on" when they try to discuss their pain.

    Reardon said that greater attention needs to be focused on the long-term effects of abortion on women and their families.

    "The common perception seems to be that abortion solves the immediate problem of a crisis pregnancy and that therefore it must be a positive thing for women," he said. "However, more and more studies such as this one show that abortion can have a severe and lasting impact on women's lives, shaping their futures and the futures of their families for years to come."

    Study Citation: Priscilla K. Coleman, Charles D. Maxey, Vincent M. Rue, and Catherine T. Coyle, "Associations between voluntary and involuntary forms of pregnancy loss and child maltreatment among low-income mothers," Acta Paediatrica 94, 2005.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    There is a lot more info. available out there; one "copyrighted" page can't be reproduced, and has some great info, so ok, here is the link:



    More Abortions, More Child Abuse (taken from)


    author name given: Dave

    Since the legalization of abortion, child abuse has increased.

    The promise had a fatal flaw in it, namely, the assumption that unwanted children are more likely to be abused. As E.F. Lenoski reported as early as 1976, the opposite is actually true. Abuse is more likely to occur among “wanted” children.

    First of all, every pregnancy is a “crisis” in the best sense of
    the term. Pregnancy creates unique demands and challenges to the
    mother to mature; the body, the mind, and the spirit must grow in
    order to accommodate to the child. This “crisis of
    incorporation,” as psychologists call it, puts the mother at a
    crossroads: either she accepts the changes required of her by the
    pregnancy, or she aborts the child, hence choosing to regress
    rather than mature.

    The choice not to mature, but rather to remain selfish, makes it
    more likely that the mother will remain a less mature parent, and
    this immaturity is a key cause of abuse and neglect of other

    A second problem is that fathers have no legal right to save
    their unborn child from an abortion. Not knowing if the child
    will live or die creates an ambivalence in the father, and a
    reluctance to bond to the child. Unattached to their baby, they
    show less support to their partner as well. After an abortion,
    the alienation worsens. Some studies show as high as an 80% rate
    of breakup of relationships after abortion. The mother’s anger at
    the lack of support from the baby’s father can be displaced to a
    born child.

    A third reason why abortion can lead to child abuse is related to
    bonding. Having an abortion makes it more difficult to bond to a
    subsequent child, and babies who are not well bonded are more
    likely to be abused and neglected. A pregnancy following abortion
    creates more anxiety, caused in part by a fatalistic sense that
    the child will be abnormal (as a punishment for having aborted
    the previous one.) This anxiety can interfere with bonding.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Sorry, I can't believe in a cause that requires deception to get people to follow. It seems we are being railroaded by a small faction of individuals into believing that eliminating constitutional rights is the answer. I firmly believe abortion bans are an assault on womens equality, womens freedom, womens right to choice, womens privacy and womens bodies. So I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

    btw.... How do you feel about drugs like levonorgestrel?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    The number of patient fatalities in mifepristone abortions is estimated at 1 in 200,000, about double the rate for suction-aspiration abortions of comparable terms, and about equal to the combined early and late term fatality rates for vacuum aspiration abortion.

    By comparison, illegal abortions lead to 1 death in 3,000 abortions, and childbirth results in death in 1 out of every 14,300 pregnancies for western women. Deaths in childbirth are significantly more common in less developed parts of the world. In comparison, less controversial drugs such as Viagra and Claritin cause many more adverse reactions.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Some Doctors Voice Worry Over Abortion Pills' Safety


    Abortion rights advocates once hoped that RU-486 would prove at least as safe as surgical abortions and largely end the abortion wars by making access widely available and very private.

    But in the wake of reports in March that two more women had died after taking abortion pills, some doctors say they are increasingly uneasy about prescribing them.

    "None of these women should be dying; it's shocking," said Dr. Peter Bours, an abortion provider in Portland, Ore., who is rethinking whether to offer pill-based, or medical, abortions.

    Dr. Warren Hern, a provider in Denver, said the latest reports demonstrated that abortions by RU-486, or Mifeprex, were far riskier than surgical ones. "I think surgery should be the procedure of choice," Dr. Hern said. Pills, he said, "are a lousy way to perform an abortion."

    When followed up by another drug, misoprostol, Mifeprex induces a miscarriage that generally occurs within two weeks. To some women, this process seems more natural than surgery, and the expulsion of the fetus often takes place at home, which some also prefer.

    But the number of women who have died in the United States after taking Mifeprex has now reached six, according to reports received by the Food and Drug Administration; another has died in Canada.

    The drug has been used in more than 560,000 abortions in this country, so the reported risk of death is a bit more than one in 100,000. Some deaths may have gone unreported, meaning the real risk may be even higher.

    By contrast, the reported risk of death associated with surgical abortion is one in a million, according to studies — one-tenth as high.

    Quite apart from death, women who undergo medical abortions suffer an increase in complications, some doctors say. A 1999 study of 377 women found that those who took the pills suffered significantly higher levels of pain, nausea, vomiting and worrisome bleeding than those who underwent surgical abortions.

    Pill-based abortions are also 5 to 10 times as likely to fail as surgical ones, and those that do fail require a follow-up surgical procedure in women whose pregnancies by then may have advanced significantly. Generally, the later a woman undergoes an abortion, the greater the risks.

    The causes of the two most recent deaths are unknown, but all five previous fatalities resulted from infections with an unusually virulent bacterium called Clostridium sordellii.

    F.D.A. officials said that there was neither a definitive link between the infections and RU-486 nor any concrete evidence that the drug increased the risk of infection beyond that found in women who underwent surgical abortions, suffered natural miscarriages or gave birth.

    Dr. Cynthia Summers, a spokeswoman for Mifeprex's manufacturer, Danco Laboratories, said a comparison of the risks of medical and surgical abortion was unfair because, she said, reports of problems with surgical procedures were poorly collected.

    And Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for medical affairs at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the nation's largest abortion provider, said, "Both surgical and medication abortion are extremely safe and effective procedures."

    The two kinds of abortion "have comparable risks with the exception of what we have recently seen as it relates to septic fatalities," Dr. Cullins said.

    Experts debate whether the method of administration has played a role in the deaths. When the F.D.A. approved Mifeprex in 2000, officials instructed doctors to give it and misoprostol orally. But Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers soon started instructing women to insert misoprostol vaginally at home two to three days after taking Mifeprex. This method allowed women to take lower doses of misoprostol and meant fewer office visits for abortion providers.

    All five women who died of infections had inserted misoprostol vaginally, Dr. Cullins said. In France, where no deaths have been reported, the oral method of administration is still standard. Planned Parenthood announced on March 17 that it would go back to giving misoprostol orally.

    Opponents of abortion have long argued that RU-486 is not safe and should be withdrawn. Some abortion rights advocates now concede that their counterparts are somewhat right.

    "The complications associated with RU-486 far exceed the complications of surgical abortion," said Dr. Damon Stutes, a provider in Reno, Nev., who refuses to offer pill-based abortions. Dr. Stutes, whose clinic has been bombed, said he was uneasy about agreeing with abortion opponents on anything.

    "But the truth is the truth," he said.

    Still, Dr. Stutes and some other physicians interviewed did not call for Mifeprex's removal from the market, since the drug may be the only option available to women in some rural areas. But women who have a choice should be steered toward surgical abortions, these doctors said.

    "One needs to tell patients that the medical procedure, even though it seems more natural, may be more likely to result in death," said Dr. Phillip G. Stubblefield, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston University.

    Dr. Stubblefield speculated that women who had inserted misoprostol vaginally might have accidentally dragged the pill across the skin near the anus, inserting bacteria that then flourished. But Dr. Mitchell Creinin, director of the division of gynecologic specialties at the University of Pittsburgh, said the method of drug administration had nothing to do with the deaths. Miscarriages, both induced and natural, can lead to infections, he said.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Quote Originally Posted by sojustask
    .....so the reported risk of death is a bit more than one in 100,000.
    But shouldn't we be satisfied with a 55% survival rate? This seems to be "realistic" standards and "not low" as some people think. :rolleyes:

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2005

    Re: FDA Should Pull Approval of RU-486

    Quote Originally Posted by UserName
    But shouldn't we be satisfied with a 55% survival rate? This seems to be "realistic" standards and "not low" as some people think. :rolleyes:

    LOL, and I wonder where you got that from? :rolleyes: rofl

    Lady Mod

Similar Threads

  1. can bernie pull it off
    By lexx in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-13-2016, 05:08 PM
  2. Just when I thought I was out they pull me back in
    By Administrator in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-17-2014, 08:58 PM
  3. Porkacraps pull their spending bill!
    By danrush1966 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-17-2010, 10:13 AM
  4. Police do not need cause to pull over illegals.
    By danrush1966 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 05-21-2010, 04:07 PM
  5. Lets all pull together
    By Steady in forum MLM Scams
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 05-24-2007, 09:20 PM

Tags for this Thread

Add / Edit Tags
$100, 000, 2001, 55%, abandoned, abc, abortion, abortions, abused, access, action, acts, add, address, administration, admit, admits, admitted, advanced, advocates, affairs, age, aid, alive, allowed, ame, america, american, animal, announced, another, answer, anus, apart, approval, approved, april, apt, assault, attention, authority, authors, babies, baby, bans, based, beautiful, ben, benefits, bit, blood, body, bombed, boston, bring, british, bur, buy, called, calls, campaign, canada, canadian, cancer, cannot, care, careful, case, catholic, caused, causing, cent, center, cer, charles, child abuse, class, cli, clinic, clinics, clinto, close, coleman, collected, common, comparable, comparison, complete, compromised, con, condi, confirmed, congressman, constant, contrast, corporation, costs, countries, country, county, courier, creates, credible, crisis, cruel, cytotec, damage, daughter, david, day, days, dea, dead, death, debate, decades, delivered, demons, diagnosis, didn, difficult, director, division, doctors, doesn, don, dona, don’t, double, dow, dozen, drug, due, dying, ear, earlier, early, effective, effects, eliminate, elliot, emergency, employees, ended, endorsed, europe, european, expert, extended, extremely, face, factor, fail, families, fatal, fathers, fda, fear, fec, federal, feel, feeling, felt, female, finds, flaw, flies, food, fra, france, gave, general, general public, girl, give, good, gov, great, green, group, growing, halted, happened, hard, healthy, heart, held, hey, hidden, hidden agenda, hiding, high, higher, his, home, horrible, hospital, hours, html, huma, human, ial, ime, impact, income, increase, individuals, info, injury, institutes, instructed, involuntary, involved, ion, iowa, issue, issues, issuing, kick, killed, killers, kind, kinds, knew, land, largest, last, latest, lawsuit, lawsuits, lead, legitimate, letter, listed, local, long, long run, los, loses, loss, lot, louisiana, making, mark, market, massive, mater, matter, mea, medical, mental, method, mexico, million, mind, minutes, mitchell, monitoring, month, more, mother, move, movement, multiple, named, nation, national, nature, needed, ner, net, normal, notes, november, number, october, office, official, officials, open, opposite, orange, org, page, part, partner, pas, pass, passed, people, perception, personally, peter, piece, pigs, pills, pit, place, planned, play, played, point, poison, policies, pos, positive, post, posted, prefer, presiden, price, privacy, private, problems, proceedings, process, professional, protect, prove, proven, proves, provider, public, published, pull, punishment, push, question, quote, ran, rated, read, real, reality, reason, receiving, recently, refuses, regime, regulations, related, released, releases, religious, research, response, responses, ress, rest, results, rev, rise, risk, role, run, rushed, safe, safety, sal, satisfied, sca, sen, sense, september, served, set, severe, shock, shocking, shouldn, simply, skin, small, soo, sorry, sounds, source, sources, speaks, special, spokesman, staff, star, state, stated, states, stop, student, subs, suc, suicide, summers, surgery, survey, surveys, survival, system, taken, takes, ted, testing, they, thought, thread, threatening, threats, time, times, told, total, treated, treatment, truth, two weeks, unfortunate, united, united states, university, unwan, url, user, usual, viagra, vice, victim, view, vince, voice, wanted, warren, wars, water, week, weeks, western, wikipedia, wise, withdraw, woma, women, womens, won, worked, working, worldwide, worse, worth, year, years, young

View Tag Cloud



Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts