Ru 486 Misconceptions Myths and Morals - ressourcesfeministes

RU 486launched a law suit against a local hospital on behalf of awoman who had become very ill and suffered extreme painsduring PG administration for a first trimester abortion. Shehad not been told about adverse effects and was never askedher permission to submit to this experimental method thathad not yet been approved as a treatment (Courage, 1979:10–11). The lawsuit led to an investigation of the hospital and itwas found that doctors had used PG on 400 women for firsttrimester abortion without informing them about theexperimental status of Nalador (sulprostone) or its adverseeffects. Four doctors pleaded guilty of using a non-approveddrug and had to pay fines. The woman’s law suit, however,was dropped and she did not receive any compensation.Similarly, a law suit against Schering (Nalador’smanufacturer) was abandoned. The drug company claimedthat they did not require written consent for the trials as thiswould deny their trust in doctors’ ethics to inform theirpatients of the nature of the experiment. Furthermore, it wouldviolate the doctors’ confidentiality. In addition, they argued thatthe trials with Nalador had been done on ill people whereoral consent was all that was necessary, thus categorizingpregnancy as disease (Gruppe Prostaglandine, 1981:40–41).The debate in Germany took on such dimensions withwomen protesting against PGs by sending lists of signaturesto the German Ministry of Health, writing critical articlesand organizing workshops to discuss the procedure and itsadverse effects, that in 1980, the Ministry of Health heldofficial Hearings on PGs in Berlin. However, feminist healthactivists reported the event as, ‘It was just a show. Eachgynecologist praised his research results—no proofnecessary—and comparisons with alternative abortionmethods were not sought’ (ibid.: 4). This, too, strikes afamiliar chord with the current debate about the ‘second wave’of chemical abortion! ‘Women who had used the PG methodand described their negative experiences were silenced andlabelled incompetent’ (idem.). Nalador was deemed a suitable98