10-04-00 Eastern Echo

RU-486 is a good thing for women's right to privacy

1985-We drove to the abortion clinic, located in a sleazy strip mall in Ypsilanti, anxious and uneasy about the procedure that was scheduled to take place to 10 a.m. on a Wednesday morning. My friend, who I will call Mary, had become pregnant after her birth control pills failed. She was 20 years old. Her boyfriend did not know she was pregnant. As Mary's best friend, I had been confided in and recruited to take her to her appointment. Was the decision to terminate her pregnancy made recklessly? No. We spent two weeks discussing her options before she decided on abortion. She was scared, no, terrified, of the idea of aborting her child. She was even more frightened of the prospect of trying to raise a child on the minimum wage she earned at her job, frightened that her boyfriend would find out and leave her, or worse, demand she continue the pregnancy. She knew she could not support a child, financially or emotionally, at that time in her life. Her decision was her own. Until we arrived at the clinic. As we got out of our car, a group of Right to Life activists descended upon us, screaming and waving brochures and grisly pictures of bloody fetuses in our faces, calling us baby killers and worse. What, in itself, was going to be an abhorrent experience was made worse by the activists who demanded we think about what we were planning to do. Like we HADN'T thought about it. Like we planned this life-altering and life-ending jaunt after only a moment's consideration. "Hmmm. I happen to be pregnant. Let's get rid of it. How's tomorrow at 10 a.m.?" RU-486 can change that. Now a form of medical abortion, or non-surgical abortion, can be prescribed in private doctor's offices, away from the angry mob of protesters that typically surround tradition abortion clinics. I can only believe that this is a good thing. It is a woman's right, as established by the U.S. government, to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. Before ever contacting a clinic about an abortion, most women have done extensive soul-searching. Rarely, if ever, is the decision to terminate a pregnancy made frivolously. Now, this private decision can remain private. I'm a firm believer in respecting a woman's right to choose. At the age of 20, I would have opted for an abortion had I become pregnant unintentionally. But a short three years later, had I become pregnant, aborting my child would have been unfathomable. I no longer believed in abortion for myself, but I continued to believe in each woman's right to make that decision for herself. Is the decision to have an abortion ever "easy"? Some Right to Life advocates believe that the distribution of the abortion pill, RU-486, will make abortion easy and encourage more women to terminate their pregnancies. A Kaiser Family Foundation survey, as cited by an Associated Press story, reported that a third of the 767 physicians in the study not currently offering abortions would consider prescribing RU-486 to their patients. More abortions? Or more private abortions? Used in France and most of Europe since the late 1980's and early 1990's, RU-486 has proven to be an effective agent for "pregnancy interruption." It has been reported that the number of women seeking abortions in France and other countries has not risen since the introduction of RU-486. We have no reason to believe it will be any different in the United States. Almost 1/3 of all abortions performed in France are done with a combination of RU-486, or mifepristone, which causes the uterine lining to soften and break down, and a form of prostaglandin, that causes the uterus to contract and expel the embryo. This combination of drugs, when used by women within 49 days of the beginning of their last menses, is 95% successful in terminating the pregnancy. The other 5% require surgical termination of the pregnancy. RU-486, and any other method of ending an unwanted pregnancy, should never be considered a form of birth control. But when a woman finds herself pregnant, unintentionally, why can't the procedure to end the pregnancy be as painless and private as possible? I held my friend Mary's hand throughout her abortion. It was gruesome to witness, and I cannot imagine how horrifying it must have been to go through it personally. The psychological trauma, some may argue, is fitting for such a hideous act. But I knew Mary, and I understood the reasons she chose to have an abortion, so I cannot say that I agree that every woman should suffer so greatly for a choice that really was no choice at all. If RU-486 had been available in 1985, I'm sure my friend Mary would have chosen that alternative. The decision to abort her child was the most painful one she has ever made. If she could have had the procedure done in the privacy of her doctor's office, at least she wouldn't have had to run the gauntlet through an angry mob of protesters. Score one for those who believe in a woman's right to choose. Let those protesters wander aimlessly in empty clinic parking lots. After all, they aren't changing anyone's mind with their posters and chanting and gross pictures. I've never heard a story of a woman who intended to have an abortion actually stopping to reconsider after meeting the protesters. By the time a woman drives up to a clinic, the decision has been made. And that decision is between a woman and her God. No one should have the right to judge her, harass her, and make an already traumatic experience even more dreadful. RU-486 will help women who have found themselves in an unfortunate situation keep this most private of decisions private. I can only believe that this is a good thing.