Abortion Pill Reversal Gaining Attention in Health Field

Amanda Casanova | Religion Today Contributing Writer | Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Abortion Pill Reversal Gaining Attention in Health Field


Many pro-life doctors are beginning to support the abortion pill reversal process. The procedure counteracts the abortion pill to try to save the unborn baby, Christianity Today reports.

 

About a year ago, California nursing student Rebecca Medina took a mifepristone abortion bill and then took a nap. When Medina woke up, she realized she had made a mistake.

 

“Something was telling me not to. I went back and forth. ‘I want to do it; no I can’t do it.’ I hadn’t dated the baby’s father very long. I had eight months nursing school yet to go and thought I am not ready. I need to finish school. It just wasn’t convenient,” she said.

 

She searched online and found AbortionPillReversal.com; representatives of the site told her there was a procedure that used progesterone to counteract the mifepristone. It had to be done as soon as possible after taking mifepristone. 

 

The procedure worked, and her son, Elijah Gabriel, was born.

 

“Many women are ambivalent about their abortion decision, and there is increasing evidence that many abortions are coerced. These women welcome the opportunity to reverse their initial decision, and should be given accurate information about this process,” said physicians Mary L. Davenport, director of public policy, and Donna J. Harrison, executive director of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) in a statement.

 

Said Abby Johnson, former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic who now works to minister to abortion clinic workers: “I’ve met several of the women and their babies who have gone through the abortion pill reversal process. It’s just a beautiful thing,” she said. “Many times [women are] pressured to abort, and they take that pill and they immediately feel regret.”

 

But abortion rights supporters have called the reversal process “junk science.”

 

 

Publication date: April 15, 2015

Comments