The TIME headline is ironic: “Study Finds Abortion Pill Safe.” Safe for whom, exactly? Certainly not for the millions of pre-born children who have died when their mothers took it. Nor is it “safe” for their mothers.
The August 15 article by Sora Song touts the findings released in the New England Journal of Medicine purporting to show that use of the RU-486 abortion pill “in the long term, is safe.” According to Song, “women who use mifepristone (RU-486) are no better or worse off than those who choose surgical abortion” and that “most existing research shows that surgical abortions have no effect on overall health risks.”
These statements are highly questionable, if not flatly false. According to the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), “There are several serious well documented side effects associated with RU-486/prostaglandin abortions, including prolonged (up to 44 days) and severe bleeding, nausea, vomiting, pain, and even death. At least one woman in
What about the safety of abortion in general? As reported in LifeNews.com, a substantial amount of research shows that women with a “history of abortion have a greater risk of fetal loss than women who had no previous abortions.” Further, extensive medical evidence links abortions to breast cancer and sterility.
But reporting facts like that doesn't fit the mainstream media's pro-abortion agenda.
While the TIME article does mention six deaths associated with the RU-486 abortion method, it chalks these up to infection, not necessarily the baby-killing drug.
And neither the TIME article nor the new study address the psychological damage that abortion can do.
The NRLC reports that, “Researchers on the after-effects of abortion have identified a pattern of psychological problems known as Post-Abortion Syndrome. Women suffering from PAS may experience drug and alcohol abuse, personal relationship disorders, sexual dysfunction, repeated abortions, communications difficulties, damaged self-esteem, and even attempt suicide. Post-Abortion Syndrome appears to be a type of pattern of denial which may last for five to ten years before emotional difficulties surface.
“The emergence of chemical abortion methods poses a new possibly more devastating psychological threat. Unlike surgical abortions, in which women rarely see the cut up body parts, women having chemical abortions often do see the complete tiny bodies of their unborn children and are even able to distinguish the child's developing hands, eyes, etc. So traumatic is this for some women that both patients and researchers involved in these studies have recommended that women unprepared for the experience of seeing their aborted children not take the drugs.”
Webster's Dictionary defines “safe” as, “free from damage, danger, etc.; having escaped injury.” Clearly, any form of abortion, surgical or via pill, cannot meet this standard. Not for the baby who is killed in the process. And not for the mother.
Kristen Fyfe is senior writer at the Culture and Media Institute, a division of the
