When Abortion Drugs Fail, Doctors are Forced to Remove Parts of the Baby’s Body

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this morning in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a case brought by pro-life physicians seeking to restore regulations on the abortion drug mifepristone. The physicians sued the FDA and abortion pill manufacturer Danco for removing safeguards on the distribution of abortion pills.

The Justices addressed a range of issues during the hearing, including one at the heart of the amicus brief Life Legal filed last week in support of the pro-life plaintiffs. Multiple justices questioned the doctors’ legal standing to challenge the FDA’s removal of safeguards on Mifepristone. The FDA argued that the plaintiffs have “no certain injury of their own.” In our brief, we point out that pro-life doctors have sustained injuries from the FDA’s deregulation of the drug since they are required to participate in abortion.

In a significant percentage of cases, abortion drugs result in baby parts being left in their mothers’ uteruses, which can cause infection, extensive bleeding, and other complications requiring emergency room care. Because the FDA has eliminated virtually all restrictions on the prescription and distribution of Mifepristone, abortion pills currently account for over 60% of all abortions.

Consequently, an increasing number of women and girls are showing up in emergency rooms with abortion pill injuries, including incomplete abortions. Doctors are forced to remove the mangled parts of unborn babies from their mothers’ uteruses and thus become complicit in a process undertaken intended to end an innocent human life.

The FDA described these injuries as “speculative.” Justice Sotomayor argued that the probability of actual harm to doctors “infinitesimally small.” We disagree – as do the doctors who are compelled to perform these gruesome procedures.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Part of the hearing turned on the question of the number of complications requiring medical intervention from the use of mifepristone. Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked the FDA what might be considered an adverse event. The FDA acknowledged that there was “evidence of increased emergency room visits” but stated that these were not necessarily adverse events. However, the FDA’s own regulations define adverse events as “any untoward medical occurrence associated with the use of a drug.” A visit to the emergency room is, by definition, an adverse event.

As we have reported before, in 2016 the FDA stopped requiring reports of non-fatal adverse events from mifepristone, so it conveniently has very little data on the dangerous side effects of chemical abortion drugs. Justice Alito questioned the abortion pill manufacturer Danco, which is also a party to the lawsuit, on this point, saying, “Wouldn’t the company want that information on a drug it is selling?” Justice Alito also asked Danco about its motivation in the lawsuit, saying, “Your injury is you will not make as much money if mifepristone is further restricted,” to which Danco’s attorney replied, “Yes.”

Justice Kagan was clearly uncomfortable articulating the difference between doctors’ being forced to complete an abortion where the child is still living as opposed to completing an abortion where the child is already dead. She awkwardly referred to the former as the removal of “live tissue.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson thought these doctors should just get exemptions when faced with procedures that violate their consciences. However, because the FDA eliminated follow-up visits from the abortion drug protocol, women often don’t seek medical care until they have an emergency. This does not afford doctors time to seek formal exemptions in abortion cases, let alone find an alternate physician to complete the abortion.

In our brief, we argue that as long as mifepristone remains unregulated, emergency room visits due to abortion pill injuries will increase and doctors will continue to be forced to participate in abortions. Attorney Erin Hawley of Alliance Defending Freedom, representing the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, echoed our arguments, saying pro-life doctors will continue to suffer harm because the FDA steadfastly refuses to restore restrictions on the distribution of the abortion drug.

We can expect a decision from the Supreme Court before July.

LifeNews Note: Alexandra Snyder is the Chief Executive Officer of the Life Legal Defense Foundation.

The post When Abortion Drugs Fail, Doctors are Forced to Remove Parts of the Baby’s Body appeared first on LifeNews.com.