I do not do abortion diaries. I don’t even participate in them other than to say I’m pro choice but this news NYT story caught my eye, so I thought I’d share it with you.
The gist? If Roe v Wade is overturned, there won’t be a return to back alley and coat hanger abortions because there’s a drug for something else on the market that, although no one knows exactly what the side effects may be, can be used by poor women to abort spontaneously. And hey, even if there are coat hanger abortions, the antibiotics we have these days will help women live through the horror. On top of that, rich women can just travel elsewhere to have their abortions so they shouldn’t worry either.
I’m not kidding.
But no change is bigger than the advent of an inexpensive drug called misoprostol, which the federal Food and Drug Administration approved for treatment of ulcers in 1988, but which has been used in millions of self-administered abortions worldwide. If the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, freeing states to ban abortion, this common prescription drug, often known by the brand name Cytotec, could emerge as a cheap, relatively safe alternative to the practices that proliferated before Roe.
“We won’t go back to the days of coat hangers and knitting needles,” said Dr. Jerry Edwards, an abortion provider in Little Rock, Ark. “Rich women will fly to California; poor women will use Cytotec.”
Because it was never intended for use in abortions, it has not been widely tested for safety and effectiveness.
…
A spokeswoman for Pfizer, which sells misoprostol under the name Cytotec, said the company does not comment on off-label use.
Of course they don’t – they’re making money off the poor – especially in Brazil where, according to the article, “misoprostol is the method of choice for up to 90 percent of all abortions”. What’s to comment on?
And widespread use of misoprostol could have another unintended consequence, said Mitchell Creinin, director of family planning at the University of Pittsburgh, who has run clinical trials on the drug. In Brazil, if women have problems with the drug, they go to the hospital to be treated for miscarriage. If women in the United States start using misoprostol for abortions, Dr. Creinin said, “someone going through a miscarriage is going to be looked at suspiciously, like, ‘Did you do something?’ “
Do you trust the government not to prosecute a woman or her doctor for this off-label use?
I posted it. You talk about it. All I have to say is this: this is 2005. Women deserve the right to control their own bodies and no law should deprive any woman of that right, no matter how far medicine has advanced or despite any alternatives out there that might serve as some crude substitute for an authentic, well-monitored medical procedure.
End the oppression of women now.
“The only good Democrat for Life is a ____” I’ll leave y’all to fill in the blanks. Needless to say, I consider that bunch to be poison. The last thing that liberals or progressives of any stripe need to be doing is to embrace oppressors or would-be oppressors. I tend to view the “Dems for Life” crowd as I would view a “Dems for Racial Purity” group. They can stay out of my way, and out of the way of my children.
OK, lets’ just assume for a moment that misoprostol would work well. How quickly would it be made illegal to prescribe to minors? Would women in general even know about it? If they did, could they get a prescription? I can see docs that wrote scrips for this being picketed. I can also see pharmacists refusing to fill such prescriptions written to women of child-bearing age. And I can certainly see it being illegal to write such a scrip for a minor without practically requiring the prescription to be written in the blood of the Virgin Mary.
So I still think we’d be back to the coat-hanger era for girls, and for poor women who could not afford to leave the country for a safe abortion.* Such a lovely time. And about those antibiotics: In what world do the authors think uninformed girls & women or those far from medical services might not bleed out before they get to a doctor? Or have a terrible, fertility-ending puncture and infection before they get help? Oh yes, back street abortions or attempts at self-abortion will be safe, thanks to the miracles of modern medicine.
Absolutely the only good I can see out of overturning Roe v. Wade is that it may take such a thunderclap to get some of the go-along to get-along Dems to get some backbone or get defeated. Not that I want overturning R.v W. to be such a catalyzing event. Haven’t we had enough already??
*My anger is coming directly from the case of the teen couple locally who induced a miscarriage by him hitting her in the abdomen with a bat. They received highly inaccurate information at a center they thought was an abortion clinic – it was rather an anti-abortion counseling center, where they were given the impression they could not get an abortion without getting parental permission (they could have, but it would have required legal steps they were not told about). So time passed, and at 6 months gestation, they decided on hitting her in the belly with a bat. It worked. The girl was not charged, as it was determined that she had not broken Michigan law – many are angry about this. However, the 16 year old boyfriend has been charged with a felony, punishable for up to 21 years. Yes, we will do well without Roe v. Wade. The current strictures on legal abortions are already showing us just how “well” we will do.
Absolutely the only good I can see out of overturning Roe v. Wade is that it may take such a thunderclap to get some of the go-along to get-along Dems to get some backbone or get defeated.
That’s why they won’t overturn it. It will mobilize Democrats and others like nothing else. (And letting the individual states decide will only lead to a crazy patchwork of laws.) Oh don’t get me wrong, they’ll attempt to narrow its application until it is damned near useless but they will stop just short of overturning it.
Sorry… but no.
It will mobilize Democrats and others like nothing else.
Boo wrote about this a few months ago… as though capitualing on Roberts was suppose to motive the base in the states. I think it will help the Greens recruitment strategy…because it is obvious that the Dems have abandoned this issue and they are insane to think that they are going to get some milege out of their shabby behavior is beyond the pale.
think that they are going to get some milege out of their shabby behavior is beyond the pale.
The only silver lining will be the political and internet consultants who get booted unceremoniously for advising the Democrats to open this Pandora’s Box.
You may be right. I guess I am in doubt, mostly because some of the Greens I know are Anti-Abortion. They add their Green beliefts into the Seamless Garment doctrines of their Catholic beliefts, and end up as Greens. I’m sure, however, that they do not characterize Greens in general.
They don’t characterize this Green.
Considering that Feminism is one of the Ten Values of the Green Party… I am surprised that you know so many anti-abortion Greens and another value is Respect for Diversity.
Parker, I’ll respond to you and to Supersoleing together. I am not saying that these folks represent typical Green beliefs – I am familiar with the 10 Values; I’m just saying that some – not many – people that I’ve known who considered themselves Greens think their position on abortion falls under nonviolence. I certainly agree that being anti-abortion is a strange position for a Green and I am not in any way defending their position on choice.
Here is that thread.
It will not provide mass motivation until it is imminent, that is, until an appropriate case comes before the court. (and the alarm is sounded, so to speak) Roberts’ confirmation in and of itself is not sufficient motivation for the average person. Bloggers such as ourselves are perhaps ahead of the curve, we are anticipating events. I suspect that the average individual is not sufficiently concerned now. Unfortunately Bushco held back on the relevant documents that might have yielded a different result. Dems should have been screaming about this, but little was said/done.
I am not sure that the mass motivation will occur even if Roe vs Wade is repealed.
Remember affluent women have always had “choice” even before Roe, and the benefits it could have provided to poor women have never been realized, and today less than ever.
That leaves the rapidly dwindling middle class, for whom a flight to a Caribbean island would be tough, but still doable.
I do not expect repeal of Roe until well after the bankruptcy bill, skyrocketing energy prices, a hefty raise in interest rates further reduce the number of women who will be most impacted.
Brilliant line.
They may not overturn it, but they will debone it. It will be rendered meaningless, like the black right to vote in many Southern states before the 1950s. Oh, you’ll have the right to get an abortion… If you can navigate the volumes and volumes of byzantine legal codes covering forms, oversight, and supervision. Never mind what you’ll have to do to become an abortion doctor. And if any case challenging these measures ever reaches the Supreme Court, they’ll rule that no violation of Roe V Wade has occurred. And the leadership of both parties will cheer, and then go back to the corporate feeding trough.
is your use of the future tense. You have accurately analyzed the current situation.
Abortion rights have already been not only deboned, but gutted, in many areas of the couuntry, and legal challenges most often prove futile, since most federal judges have yet to see a restriction that they considered an “undue” burden.
Roe‘s putative protections are gradually, one by one, withering away, and in states where abortion rights go undefended it will live on in name only — being left to languish oh, so very quietly, on a feeding tube.
In states where abortion is even partially restricted, such as Texas, there is already a thriving trade in illegally obtained misoprostol. We call it “street Cytotec.” It is generally obtained from Mexico, and its use is most prevalent in Spanish-speaking communities, but word is spreading rapidly into the population at large and some women purchase it over the Internet.
In early pregnancy, during approximately the first eight weeks, it is about 90% effective in inducing abortion. Our clinic sees a couple of women a week for whom miso didn’t produce the desired result. They report being charged up to $15 per tablet, and some of them have swallowed or vaginally inserted up to 25-30 200 mcg tablets — which is up to ten times the standard therapeutic dosage for the second stage of medical abortion that is begun with either Mifeprex or methotrexate.
Even much lower dosages could be fatal for women in their second trimester, not only because of the very real danger of massive hemorrhage, but because the strong contractions misoprostol induces could result in scar dehiscence and rupture of the uterus in women with a history of previous delivery by Cesarean section.
BTW, I know Dr. Jerry Edwards, and his comment that poor women will use Cytotec is an accurate prediction, but most assuredly not a cavalier endorsement.
has been sentenced to 200 hours of community service in one of those same “pro-life” crisis pregnancy centers.
That is one of the drugs I take on a daily basis. Four pills of 200 micrograms four times daily. It is used as a motility drug in my case.
What dosages are they talking about for these spontaneous abortions? Much higher I assume. I haven’t experienced any negative side effects at the dose I take, but that is hardly a harbinger of the effect it would have on single use for abortion.
Another issue is that what pharmacist or doctor would risk murder charges in states where abortions are illegal and where state statutes make it a felony to kill the unborn? Very few, I suspect. So we are talking about people obtaining foreign prescriptions and supplies over the internet or as part of a black market distribution system. I can see my medical cost for thi sdrug (now relatively cheap) explode if this scenario plays out.
I can see my medical cost for thi sdrug (now relatively cheap) explode if this scenario plays out.
Actually, I can see the wingers pushing the FDA to severely limit use of the drug, if not ban it entirely. Look at what they’ve done to block the OTC use of Plan B emergency contraception.
Yes, a battle between Big Pharma and fundie wingnuts. Wanna take odds on who would win?
We should just leave them both in the Thunderdome until neither one can get back up off the floor.
Big Pharma.
YAY?
Wingnuts would win, as they have with Plan B thus far. At least until the current ruler is out of office.
As I mentioned in my reply to Kidspeak, a big part of the problem is that women who obtain Cytotec illegally have no guidance in determining an adequate dosage, and that decision is most often driven by [1] the profit motive of suppliers who wish to sell them as much of the drug as possible and [2] the women’s own desperation.
Doctors and/or pharmacists currently are not involved in the process at all. This scenario isn’t some future development, but is already being played out all over the country in states where abortion is so heavily regulated and restricted that Roe might as well not exist at all for certain groups of abortion-seeking women. It is already an ugly situation, and getting uglier by the day.
If BushCo. has control over the SCOTUS, I don’t believe they will allow them to overturn Roe v Wade. Whether there is a “kinda safe” abortion pill for the poor and abortions on demand elsewhere for the not so poor or not, I think the women of the U.S. would pretty much go crazy over that ruling. Then most Republican congressmen and senators would be in deep shit. On the other hand, it could happen if this court becomes a very conservative one, AFTER the Dems take back the congress and/or White House, for obvious reasons.
I think that perhaps you misinterpret what the right-wing agenda really is.
When you consider that birth control and sex education are also under attack by the same people, you start to realize that stopping abortion is not the end they seek, but merely a means towards the end. They are out to disempower women in general. They are the ones who say women should not be working, should not be going to college, should not be having adult lives outside of marriage.
I do not think they fear that women “would pretty much go crazy” over this agenda — I think they expect it. That is why they’re working so hard to control the government, including the courts — so that even if we “go crazy,” there’s nothing we can do about it.
This is the front-line agenda of the Christian Taliban, the dominionists who want to make this democracy into a theocracy. And we have politicians playing along because they fear, or have bought into, the “values” talk, and because nobody outside of reproductive rights groups is speaking up about progressive values and equal rights for all.
What part of “barefoot and pregnant” don’t you understand?
As I diaried last May in The Farm Maid’s Tale, it’s already happening.
Re misopristol: Teratology (study of birth defects) Meeting this summer shared data from Brazil where this drug is obtained on the black market and widely used to induce abortions (which are illegal in Brazil). When abortion is not induced, there is an association to a bizarre pattern of fetal malformation called Mobius syndrome. This is difficult to either prevent or prove, because the women taking the drug are scared to admit to it. Not sure at all that this is a step up from coat hangers.
Note when Cytotec used at recommended doses along with methotrexate to induce abortions, it does just that.
the cited article quotes Dr. Creinin further:
Dr. Mitch Creinin isn’t just some doctor whom the writer rounded up because the article needed some color quotes. Among his peers in the United States, he is considered to be probably the preeminent expert on medication abortion. If he thinks women in this country are headed for trouble with self-induced miso abortion, we’d better listen.
Thanks for all of your input on this, moiv.
who doesn’t do abortion diaries, you posted a pretty good one. 🙂
Just because I don’t post them doesn’t mean I;m not very concerned. Luckily, our Canadian Conservative Party decided at their policy convention before the last election that they were taking the abortion issues off the table. There will always be opposition here, but we’re much further away from the threats women face in the US.
and my colleagues in Canada are thoroughly horrified at the direction this country is taking.
The right-wingers have worked for years to ban such drugs; why would they stop with misprostol? They would demand the government crack down on its use. The anti-abortion crowd is all about controlling the woman, not protecting the fetus.
I wish I had something insightful to say here. I was in my late twenties when Roe v. Wade was decided. I remember the days of back alley abortions and dead young women left in ditches when the abortion killed them. I have no desire to return to those days.
I live in a coutry where abortion is illegal. That article is based on total ignorance. If the US goes back to the bad old days, there will be back street abortions and they will be expensive, and women will die or suffer permanent injuries, as well as facing jail time. The poor will suffer the most as they wont be able to hop onto a plane and have private treatment in a more civilized country. We may even see the advent of “abortion tourism” for the moneyed classes. Poor women on the other hand will also experiment with all manner of drug and alcohol cocktails in desperation. That is what happens when abortion is illegal. It is not something an ill thought out article in a once (a long time ago) internationally respected newspaper should be demeaning.
Argentina is one of the countries where self-induced abortion with misoprostol is very common. It’s not a third-world nation; far from it. This is merely what happens in every country in the world where abortion is against the law.
thank you so very much for your comment and for raising this most important point. I’m afraid that this article (and others like it) will be used in the future by many, who do not believe in a woman’s right to choose, to falsely minimize the effects of the re-criminalization of abortion in this country. to my way of thinking a dead woman is a dead woman, whether from back-alley surgery or from drug-overdose.
The one that says that it is safer to have an early term abortion than it is to carry to term and deliver a baby. They really hate that one……I suppose now they can make the odds more 50/50 this way!