De-regulation of Abortion Pill Misses the Point

From The Daily Declaration:

 

2 NOVEMBER 2023

6.2 MINS

As of August 1st, chemical abortions have potentially been easier to access across Australia following the federal government’s decision to deregulate the process for prescribing the abortion pill. GPs are no longer required to complete the training and are no longer required to re-register every three years.

Additionally, nurse practitioners – subject to state laws – are now able to dispense the abortion pill and are covered by a Medicare rebate. The changes also affect pharmacists, as the new policy allows an increased number to stock the abortion pill. However, abortion proponents appear unable to understand the real reasons why many women around the country have trouble accessing terminations.

The regulatory changes surrounding the abortion pill were made in response to a Senate inquiry report released last May. The report stated that Australian women, particularly those in rural areas, need greater access to abortion services and that loosening restrictions around chemical abortion was one way to achieve that.

Unsafe

Although usually referred to as the abortion “pill”, a chemical abortion comprises a regimen of two drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol, which are taken over several days, usually in the first nine weeks of pregnancy. As well as being lethal for babies, there is a great deal of evidence to show that the abortion pill is dangerous for women, and many jurisdictions worldwide have chosen to maintain restrictions on its availability. Despite this, Ged Kearney, the Assistant Minister for Health, claims that the abortion pill is completely safe and that the new guidelines will bring Australia into line with the rest of the world.

In Australia, the abortion pill is sometimes known as RU-486 and is marketed under the name “MS 2-Step”. The sole supplier here is abortion-behemoth MSI, the organisation formerly known as Marie Stopes International, which changed its name after the eugenics mentality of its founder Marie Stopes became widely known. Until now, MSI has been the sole provider or trainer for health professionals wanting to dispense the abortion pill and still controls the registration process.

Data for the Senate inquiry originated from researchers at Melbourne’s Monash University SPHERE programme. According to its website, SPHERE, also known as the SPHERE Centre of Research Excellence, “seeks to improve awareness, availability and access to sexual and reproductive health services for all Australian women.”

Reluctance

SPHERE has been pushing nurse-led medical abortion for years, as well as increased provision of long-acting reversible contraception devices, or LARCs. According to data from SPHERE, only 10% of Australian GPs prescribe the abortion pill, and only 30% of pharmacists can dispense it, meaning that half of Australian women can’t obtain an abortion locally.

This data has been spun by pro-abortion spokesmen and the media to conclude that the former regulations surrounding the abortion pill were preventing doctors and chemists from providing medical abortions. Yet the truth is that most GPs and pharmacists have been making a deliberate decision not to prescribe or dispense MS 2-Step.

SPHERE’S own studies debunk the idea that it is legislation that throws up obstacles to the provision of abortion services. Its recent international meta-study of over 6000 medical professionals showed: “Fear of criminal prosecution and conservative attitudes towards abortion determined whether or not health professionals provided the service and or referrals.”

The study also found that most “primary care providers have poor knowledge of medical abortion service provision”, but somehow concluded that “changes in legislation” would give medical professionals the confidence to provide abortions and to “become exemplars of abortion advocacy in their respective countries.”

SPHERE spokesperson Professor Danielle Mazza AM believes that the need for training and registration created ‘suspicion’ about medical abortions in the eyes of GPs. Mazza suggests that doctors would think, “Maybe there’s something I don’t know about medical abortion,” and decide not to provide them. She said that “… in the past, GPs had concerns about the process — many were not sure about the registration process or why it was in place.”

Such comments are an example of the kind of sophistry often engaged in by pro-abortion ideologues: it is beyond belief that medical professionals, who are some of the most intelligent people around, are unable to acquaint themselves with a simple registration process, or that the need for training put them off prescribing a drug which is apparently in high demand.

Read the rest of the article here

Leave a comment