Having won approval, Canadian pro-abortionists complaint about “strict” RU-486 protocol

By Dave Andrusko

Mifegymiso--the name for RU-486 technique in Canada

Mifegymiso–the name for RU-486 technique in Canada

Elsewhere today, NRL News Today offers two posts (here and here) with more about the abortifacient RU-486.

Both remind us that this two drug abortion technique had already been associated with the deaths of 14 women just in the United States when last we had an update from the FDA–and that was in 2011!

But, as of March 30, the technique will be easier to access with fewer safety measures and used later in pregnancy–now up to ten weeks. This is terrible news. Alas, there is more bad news, this time from North of the Border.

As we’ve reported previously, the drug approval for RU-486 in Canada has been had gone for years and years. However, with recent approval by Health Canada, the same abortion technique–called Mifegymiso in Canada–will be available as of this July.

And ever-gracious in victory, the Canadian abortion industry is already lamented how “strict” the protocol is. What are these “strict” requirements?

Well, that only doctors who have complete a certified, online training program will be allowed to prescribe and dispense Mifegymiso–and must be in the woman’s presence when she takes the first drug (mifepristone).

Critics want midwives and nurse practitioners to be able to prescribe it and pharmacists to dispense it.

To give you some idea how over-the-top the inflammatory rhetoric has already become, Sharon Kirkey, writing for the National Post, tells us

In addition, in a situation some have likened to a heroin addict on methadone maintenance, a doctor may insist on witnessing the woman taking the first dose — a practise normally reserved in cases of suspected drug diversion or misuse

The combined requirements

will severely limit the availability of Mifegymiso “and its potential to transform abortion access in Canada,” added Sandeep Prasad, executive director of Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights.

By “transform[ing] abortion access,” they mean increasing the number of abortions by multiplying the number of abortions in rural areas. In yet another example of how the Abortion Industry works hand in glove with academics, we read

A newly published study by Norman and her colleagues shows that, outside B.C. and Quebec, abortion facilities are located only in the largest urban centres for most jurisdictions.

In all, the researchers identified 94 facilities providing abortions in Canada in 2012; nearly half (49 per cent) were in Quebec. Administrators reported performing a total of 75,650 abortions in 2012. Less than four per cent were medical (non-surgical) abortions.

The problems, from their point of view? Not enough abortions (of course!); not enough chemical abortions; not enough abortions outside large urban centers.

Finally, it’s worth mentioned how thoroughly proponents dehumanize the unborn child whose life would be taken if her mother uses Mifegymiso:

The drug blocks the hormone progesterone, which normally helps prepare the lining of the uterus for a pregnancy. The lining breaks down and sheds, similar to what happens during a woman’s menstrual period. Misoprostol causes the uterus to contract, expelling the pregnancy.

(1) There already IS a pregnancy

(2) In shedding the lining, you starve the developing baby

(3) It is NOT like what happens during a woman’s menstrual period, no many how many times they make this bogus analogy

(4) And it is not “the pregnancy” that is expelled but the baby.

Let’s hope Health Canada does not buckle under to pro-abortion pressure.

Editor’s note. If you want to peruse stories all day long, go directly to nationalrighttolifenews.org and/or follow me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha