Pro-abortion website The Mary Sue reported on a bill being considered in Wyoming that would institute 48-hour waiting periods before a woman can undergo an abortion. Writer Kylie Cheung slammed the law as “offensive” and “condescending,” and claimed that waiting periods “have virtually zero bearing on changing women’s minds.”
“The bill suggests women are fundamentally incapable of fully considering their decision to have an abortion on their own, and that they quite literally have to be told to think, despite how women who go to clinics seeking abortion care have already made up their minds,” Cheung wrote. She also slammed Sheridan Representative Richard Tass, who introduced the bill. According to Wyoming Public Media, Tass said the bill is needed because “unlike a clothing purchase, women can’t change their minds about an abortion” and “the bill gives women time to consider the gravity of the decision.”
Interestingly, both Cheung and Tass are wrong on this issue. While Cheung dismisses the necessity of waiting periods, they have been found to save lives — and they don’t end up being horrible inconveniences to women, who often are still able to get an abortion in less than two weeks — meaning the pro-abortion narrative that waiting periods prevent women from being able to go through with their decision is patently false.
Perhaps more importantly, Americans have consistently shown that they support waiting periods, in numerous polls from outfits like Gallup and Rasmussen. But what Americans actually want doesn’t matter to abortion advocates… after all, abortion wasn’t decided by the people through their lawmakers; it was decided by a group of unelected, unaccountable judges.
As for Tass, it is true that women can’t change their minds about surgical abortions. But abortion reversal has become a reality for women who have begun the abortion pill regimen.
Abortion activists frequently attack the abortion reversal process — but it is a legitimate scientific procedure that can counteract the first pill in the RU-486 regimen, mifepristone. Mifepristone blocks progesterone from getting to the placenta, essentially starving the baby of oxygen and nutrients, and leading to his death. The second pill in the regimen, misoprostol, induces labor so the mother expels the body of her dead baby and the placenta.
Dr. Karen Poehailos is a family medicine practitioner who has saved babies using abortion reversal, and explained to Live Action News how it works. “The mifepristone bonds with the progesterone receptors in the placenta. We give a lot of progesterone to try to overcome that and let the progesterone get there to keep the placenta going and thus save the baby,” she said. In the case of Poehailos’ first abortion reversal patient, the patient had already begun bleeding after taking mifepristone. “The first ultrasound showed an area of hemorrhage inside the placenta, and she did have some bleeding, but the ultrasound showed the baby was alive,” Poehailos said. “Over the next couple of shots through the next couple of days, that area disappeared. The progesterone was able to counteract the mifepristone and allow the placenta to heal itself. I think if we hadn’t given her that… well, she may not have completed the abortion on her own, but she was bleeding and the placenta was breaking down, and we saw it on the ultrasound. It wasn’t medical theater; it was reality.”
Women deserve to not be rushed into having an abortion, a luxury they aren’t likely to find within the abortion industry. They also deserve to know that if they change their minds, there is a way for them save their babies.
For more information, visit AbortionPillRescue.com.
“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!