Kansas legislators have not only endorsed bad medicine, but also false hopes for pregnant women by insisting that Kansas physicians and clinics promote an abortion “reversal” pill.
The pill is the hormone progesterone, which, they contend, can negate the effects of mifepristone, the first pill of a two-drug medical abortion regime.
Mifepristone works to block the effects of progesterone, necessary for a healthy uterus to harbor and develop an embryo. If compromised, the embryo can detach from the life-giving lining of the uterus.
The second medicine is misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract and miscarry.
The two medications are to be taken within six to 72 hours of each other to end early-stage pregnancies up to 10 weeks.
According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, if a woman changes her mind mid-stream, the recommendation is to simply not take the second pill with a 50 percent chance of a continued pregnancy.
Abortion opponents have convinced legislators that high doses of progesterone can somehow counteract the effect of mifepristone and increase the chances of a continued pregnancy.
It would behoove both abortion opponents and legislators to consult practicing physicians.
Instead, they are relying on the anti-abortion group Kansans for Life that bases its stance on a study conducted by Dr. George Delgado, a San Diego physician. In a 2012 report featured in the Annals of Pharmacotherapy, Delgado said his treatment of six pregnant women who received mifepristone followed by injections of progesterone resulted in four healthy pregnancies.
Hardly a robust study, and yet Kansas legislators were willing to pass legislation making the practice mandatory under penalty of $10,000 for clinics that don’t post such information, and charges up to a felony offense for physicians who fail to incorporate the law into practice.
ONLY MEDICAL professionals can prescribe the abortion pills, approved by the Federal Drug Administration. Women must sign a consent form to receive the prescription not only acknowledging their understanding of the treatment but also to ensure a follow-up visit within two weeks.
To insist that medical providers counsel patients about the progesterone is unnecessary, at best, and misleading as to a woman’s chances that steps already taken have not caused termination to a pregnancy.
This is an example of legislators unnecessarily inserting themselves in the middle of a doctor-patient relationship.
Gov. Kelly vetoed the legislation Monday, citing the interference as well as the unproven effectiveness of the “reversal” method.
