Post-Roe infanticide numbers continue to rise, thanks to TELEHEALTH ABORTIONS

08/27/2024 / By Ava Grace

Telehealth abortions were responsible for the reversal of a decline in infanticide numbers following the 2022 overturn of the Roe v. Wade abortion ruling, an op-ed argues.

Jonathon Von Maren put forward this argument in an Aug. 14 piece on LifeSiteNews, which featured his interview with pro-life statistician and political scientist Dr. Michael New. He cited numbers released by the U.S. Society of Family Planning (SFP) as part of its #WeCount projects to back up his case. According to the group’s estimates, abortion numbers continue to rise.

The SFP found that in the first three months of 2024, the number of abortions increased by 13.8 percent. It also found that during the same period, 20 percent of all abortions were done via telehealth – something Von Maren described as “alarming.”

“When a woman obtains a telehealth abortion, she is mailed chemical abortion pills without an in-person medical exam. Telehealth abortions are self-reported by companies that send abortion pills through the mail. This raises questions about the accuracy of these abortion estimates,” he wrote.

“These companies may have incentives to inflate their numbers. Furthermore, the fact that abortion pills were ordered does not necessarily mean that an abortion was obtained. Some women might have changed their minds. Others might have ordered chemical-abortion pills for future use.” (Related: Kamala Harris: Owned by Big Pharma, big trans, and big abortion.)

Von Maren continued that the increased availability of chemical drugs is causing the rise in abortions. He also noted the Biden administration’s role in making these abortifacient drugs more accessible.

In 2016, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expanded the gestational age limit for chemical abortions from seven weeks to 10 weeks. It also allowed nurse practitioners and other medical professionals that same year to prescribe mifepristone, one of the two drugs used in chemical abortions alongside misoprostol.

Also in 2016, the FDA approved a dosing regimen – requiring women obtaining chemical abortions to make only one visit to a health care professional instead of three. The regulator later announced in 2021 that the one-visit requirement would no longer be enforced.

Shield laws contributed to rise in chemical abortions

Citing data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Von Maren said the percentage of chemically induced infanticide out of all abortions increased from 30.3 percent to 56 percent between 2016 and 2021. He continued: “It should not come as a surprise that after a fairly consistent 36 year decline, the U.S. abortion rate increased in 2017 and has increased since that time.”

In the first quarter of this year, more than 27,000 telehealth abortions took place under shield laws – more than nine percent of the total. Shield laws, which are in effect in six blue states, provide legal protection to medical professionals who send chemical abortion pills into states with legal protections for pre-born children.

“The abortion pill presents a new era in the abortion wars,” New told Von Maren. “Pro-lifers need to prioritize preventing chemical abortions.”

To achieve this goal, he suggested three strategies pro-lifers can take – first of which is using litigation against the FDA. According to New, it can be strongly argued that the FDA did not follow its own rules regarding testing and safety when they eased access to chemical abortion drugs in 2016 and 2021.

A second strategy is using litigation to invalidate shield laws. The pro-life political scientist noted that attorneys general in several red states are reportedly mulling various litigation strategies against the six blue states with shield laws in place.

Lastly, New suggested electing a pro-life president as a third strategy. He expressed hope that the pro-life president would simply appoint FDA personnel who would limits on the shipment and use of chemical abortion drugs if elected.

“Donald Trump has certainly not made any promises to place limits on chemical abortions. However, his FDA appointees would certainly be more sympathetic to the concerns of pro-lifers than an appointees made by Kamala Harris,” New remarked.

Visit Abortions.news for similar stories.

Watch this ABC News report about Arizona residents voting on abortion rights this November.

This video is from the TrendingNews channel on Brighteon.com.