In 1992, when I arrived at the Rayburn House Office Building to serve as a summer intern for then-Oregon Rep. Ron Wyden, the Democrat’s office was feverishly preparing for a congressional hearing on a drug called “RU-486.” The actress Cybil Shepherd testified, drawing attention to the proceedings, and we pored over data regarding the safety and efficacy of the drug we now know as mifepristone. At the time, mifepristone was only available in France, but the experience from that country had already demonstrated that the drug was effective, as safe or safer than surgical abortion — and much more affordable.
Mifepristone became legal in the U.S. in 2000, and its availability dramatically shifted the majority of early abortions to a medication-induced process that occurs in the privacy of one’s home.
Mifepristone became legal in the U.S. in 2000, and its availability dramatically shifted the majority of early abortions to a medication-induced process that occurs in the privacy of one’s home. It is used in conjunction with another medication, misoprostol, which prompts the contractions that complete the abortion. Twenty years of post-marketing data across more than 3 million usages for unwanted pregnancy has only strengthened the positive medical reputation of this drug combination.
On Friday in Texas, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that the FDA’s initial approval of mifepristone was unlawful. The plaintiffs, a collection of anti-abortion groups calling itself the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, had argued that the medication poses an unusual danger to the patient having an abortion. The plaintiffs expressed concern that the drug causes side effects, including cramping, bleeding and pain, that patients who use it experience regret and mental health sequelae, and that doctors who oppose abortion should not have to treat any complications that occur.
When Kacsmaryk issued his decision, Dr. Jennifer Lincoln, an ob/gyn and executive director…
Read the full article here