A Supreme Court ban of this abortion pill could have massive implications for my NC patients | Opinion
On March 26, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear a case that will directly touch the lives of obstetrician-gynecologists like me and and our patients here in North Carolina.
The Supreme Court is considering an unprecedented reversal of FDA approval of mifepristone, a pill that has been on the market for over 20 years and is used safely and effectively in over half of abortions in this country. It’s part of a two-drug regimen (mifepristone followed by misoprostol) that is supported by major medical organizations for medication abortions.
The World Health Organization classifies mifepristone as one of the “core essential medications,” meaning one that is needed for “a basic health-care system” and is among the “most efficacious, safe and cost–effective medicines for priority conditions.”
As a board-certified OB/GYN with certification in Complex Family Planning, I know there is an abundance of evidence clearly indicating that mifepristone is exceedingly safe and effective.
If it becomes unavailable, my patients in North Carolina will suffer. Those who have a pregnancy loss and desire the most effective regimen for medical treatment will be denied access to that care.
My patients seeking abortions who might choose medical treatment will not be able to get mifepristone — the standard of care. They will be forced to choose a different medication regimen, one with potentially more side effects, or perhaps feel forced into choosing a surgical procedure.
I will have to tell my patients that I am no longer able to prescribe them the medication that I know works best because politicians have decided I should no longer be able to do so.
It’s important to note that one of the main studies that was cited by the federal judge in his prior ruling against mifepristone has been retracted by its publisher. This study, published by known anti-abortion advocates, attempted to raise concerns about the safety of mifepristone, listing a much higher rate of complications than what has been shown in numerous other studies. The judge used this as evidence to support concerns about the safety of mifepristone.
However, this paper, along with two others related to abortion complications, were retracted based on the publisher’s expert reviewers finding that all three studies lacked “scientific rigor” leading to the conclusions being deemed invalidated and/or unreliable.
Mifepristone is not only used in abortions but also in medical treatment of miscarriages. If mifepristone becomes unavailable, there are safe alternative treatments available that are still effective, but less so than the current approved regimen.
As we have seen in other legal rulings around the country attempting to restrict access to reproductive care and limit bodily autonomy — such as the recent Alabama ruling limiting access to IVF — this baseless attack on mifepristone by anti-abortion politicians and special interest groups will harm not only patients who seek abortions but also those who are experiencing a pregnancy loss, or even a healthcare emergency.
This attack on mifepristone is yet another example of legal challenges that are not rooted in science or medical evidence, and that center political ideology over patient needs and experiences.
While access to abortions is an essential component of comprehensive reproductive healthcare that all my patients deserve, these political attacks continue to harm patients beyond those seeking abortions, and the mifepristone case is yet another example.
When it comes to providing the best care to all patients, politics and healthcare don’t mix.
Dr. A. Jenna Beckham is an obstetrician gynecologist in the Triangle area.
