Links:
RU-486
Many predicted that the FDA's approval of the controversial "abortion pill," RU-486, last September would have massive ramifications on the presidential election. But there was hardly an uprising; rather, people divided themselves neatly along party lines. The pill's approval merely strengthened the divide that was already in place.
RU-486, which will be marketed in the US under the name Mifeprex, has been in use in Europe for the past decade. A pregnant woman takes two sets of drugs over the course of three days, causing the uterine lining to shed, resulting in a miscarriage. It is a more private and natural-feeling end to an unwanted pregnancy, rather than a surgical abortion, which can be more traumatizing due to the stigma and, sometimes, danger of visiting an "abortion clinic." The approval of the abortion pill means that women can get the pills from a doctor and abort in the privacy of their own homes, although a follow-up visit is necessary.
|
"The approval of the abortion pill means that women can get the pills from a doctor and abort in the privacy of their own homes" |
But even as pro-lifers in Congress introduced bills to restrict the uses of the abortion pill in early October, and pro-lifers elsewhere began trying to use state laws to tighten regulations, these are decidedly partisan moves, especially the emphasizing of "state's rights," a Republican battle cry. Potential restrictions include parental consent for minors and designated waiting periods, both restrictions that are already in place for surgical abortions. Virginia has already declared that doctors will require parental consent. But these moves signify that the initiation of RU-486 will serve to further divide the nation along party lines.
The drug does not face the ultimate danger of being eradicated by individual states, which lack the authority to override FDA decisions. But after a complicated and bitter election has already split the nation, the debate over the new abortion pill seems old hat, old news, and just one more thing to divide a nation.
|
Free Your Speech :
Oct. 28, 2000: David J. Zaber Madison, Wis. Your full of ****, you insane y-vote people. In reality George W. Bush's indifference to global warming is all the more disturbing given the new report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. You are correct to say that the current inaction is Congress's fault, however. The Bush camp has already indicated that it would work against taking actions that will buffer the inevitable climate change. Mr. Bush's positions include logging more forests, drilling for more oil in sensitive ecosystems and instituting voluntary pollution-control measures. This will hardly help push Congress to craft meaningful legislation to address the problem Congress and the Bush camp should think of fighting global warming as another form of social security. Only this time, it's not just another entitlement.
|