Ru 486 Misconceptions Myths and Morals - ressourcesfeministes

Claims for RU 486/PG Abortionan immense disparity in definitions of self-administration,privacy, and women’s control of the abortion procedure whendefined by the medical researchers and clinicians, and whendefined by everyday people.Safety versus Contraindications/ComplicationsThere are a host of conditions, contraindications, andcomplications that expose the fallacy of the ‘safe and effective’claims for RU 486/PG abortion. To begin, close medicalsupervision is necessary to establish the existence and lengthof pregnancy; to monitor bleeding and possibly perform ablood transfusion; to administer narcotic analgesics if womenexperience severe pain; to use ultrasound to determinecomplete expulsion of the embryo and tissue after the finaltreatment protocol; and to perform a conventional abortionif the chemical abortion is incomplete and/or the pregnancycontinues. Added to this fact is that many women worldwidedo not seek—or have access to—medical treatment promptlyenough for chemical abortion to work. Particularly indeveloping countries women may not be able to obtain timelytreatment, or the immense surveillance protocol nowestablished as routine for chemical abortions. They musttravel to a medical center several times—usually from adistance—for the various steps of treatment and testing. Theproblems of access and monitoring are equally real for manypoor, indigenous, rural and other minority women inindustrialized countries as well as the obvious difficulties forwomen in non-industrialized countries, who have noopportunity to receive this multi-step medical backup that isessential for minimum RU 486/PG abortion safety.Those who have administered RU 486/PG reportcompliance and follow-up problems in the white, middleclass,western world. When asked whether there was anysucceeding supervision to ascertain the future fertility ofwomen who underwent RU 486/PG abortions in theSouthern California trials, Daniel Mishell responded: ‘…we31