Congressman to probe whether taxpayers are funding telemed abortions

Aside from the controversy over the legality and safety of telemed RU-486 abortions, Iowa Republican Congressman Steve King wants to know if federal tax dollars are financing it.

Rep. King is currently circulating a request to colleagues to sign on to a letter he will soon send to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius asking whether taxpayers are underwriting Planned Parenthood’s expansion of telemed technology, such as computers and phone lines. Congress allocated $11.6 million to HHS for Fiscal Year 2010 for its telehealth program.

Following is the “Dear Colleague” letter. Please encourage your congressperson to contact Rep. King’s office and sign on in support. Click to enlarge….

[Read the rest of this entry…]

Editorial promoting telemed abortions in Iowa admits they’re currently being done illegally

In a September 5 editorial promoting the legalization of RU-486 telemed abortions, the Des Moines Register editorial board had to admit Planned Parenthood of the Heartland is currently committing them illegally. Read carefully:

… Planned Parenthood of the Heartland has used telemedicine as it was intended: to expand access to legal health services in rural Iowa. The challenge of that smart approach should prompt state leaders to update laws and policies – to give Iowans increased access to health care, including abortion, through the use of technology.

[Read the rest of this entry…]

Tell Iowa Board of Medicine to shut down Planned Parenthood’s telemed abortions

The Iowa Board of Medicine, which meets 6x a year, next convenes on August 20.

IBOM notified Operation Rescue on April 22 it was opening an investigation of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, pursuant to OR’s formal complaint that PP was committing illegal RU-486 abortions by telemed. Watch this May 17 KCCI News report if you don’t know what I’m talking about:

[Read the rest of this entry…]

Telemed quick hits: Of course it was in the federal stimulus bill; Planned Parenthoods in CA/UT up next; On guard MN

  • Telemed funding is in the federal stimulus bill. From the Telemedicine Information Exchange, February 19, 2009:
  • federal stimulus.jpg

    Specific telemedicine spending in final stimulus bill: The recently passed $787 billion economic stimulation bill includes $19 billion for health information technology. Specific for telemedicine, it will provide… $1.5 billion for HRSA [Health Resources and Services Administration] to use to build or repair health centers and/or to purchase equipment, and $85 million for health IT and telehealth technologies within the Indian Health Service. In addition ot this, much of the other HIT money will most likely have telehealth applications….

    [Read the rest of this entry…]

    Planned Parenthood using telemed in Alaska; plans Northwest expansion

    ppgnw picture.png
    I’ve previously said I think Planned Parenthood’s plans to commit RU-486 telemed abortions nationwide are much farther along than they’re letting on….

    [Read the rest of this entry…]

    Coming soon (already here?): Taxpayer funded telemed abortion systems

    The New York Times reported on June 8:
    telemed nyt.jpg

    So far only Planned Parenthood clinics in IA use this [RU-486 telemed abortion] method, but around the country, abortion providers have begun asking how they might replicate the concept.

    I don’t necessarily believe it’s true that RU-486 telemed abortions are confined to IA at this point. Adding fuel to my fire is the article below that Pro-Life WI has dug up, posted by The Business Journal of Milwaukee on July 10, 2009….

    [Read the rest of this entry…]

    Planned Parenthood does two-step on telemed abortions

    Read the backstory here.
    On May 21 IA Public Radio reported:
    telemed abortions ifrl.jpg

    … Clinics around the country have been inquiring about the [abortion telemed] system, and already Planned Parenthood of East Central IA will also be signing on, making abortion available for the first time at their clinics in Cedar Rapids and Dubuque, which lack full-time physicians on staff.
    [PPECI] Dir. of Patient Services Barbara Chadwick says it’s the goal of PP to expand abortion services at its clinics nationwide over the next 5 years….

    [Read the rest of this entry…]

    The abortion industry’s looming RU-486 legal crisis

    RU-486 mifepristone abortion pillA Politico article today about new abortion cases that could reach the Supreme Court gave bare mention of its potential review of RU-486 regulation.

    But due a circuit court split on laws regulating the administration of RU-486, such a review looks likely - and promising for the pro-life side.

    Quick history of RU-486

    In an unprecedented move the FDA approved the abortion pill RU-486 (now known as mifepristone/mifeprex) in 2000 to sell in the U.S. using a fast-track process reserved only for drugs to combat life-threatening diseases, like AIDS.

    RU-486 abortion pill NOW mifepristoneIt seemed obvious at the time, and was later confirmed, that ”the Clinton administration pushed the abortion pill through the approval process to appease the abortion lobby,” reported Judicial Watch in 2006 after reviewing newly released documents that showed “the RU-486 approval process was infected by raw politics.”

    But pro-lifers have recently begun turning the abortion industry’s political ploy on itself.

    Importantly, with the FDA’s fast-track approval came “restricted use,” meaning the agency discourages “off-label” administration of RU-486.

    In 14 years the FDA has never deviated from its recommended protocol for RU-486, which requires three doctor visits and specific dosages and routes of administration, all within 49 days from the beginning of a pregnant mother’s last period:

    • Day 1: administer three 200 mg tablets (600 mg total) of RU-486 orally to kill the baby
    • Day 3: administer two 200 mcg tablets (400 mcg total) of Cytotec (misoprostol) orally to expel the baby
    • Day 14: check-up to ensure the abortion was completed

    Violating FDA protocol at every step

    But abortion clinics violate FDA protocol in every possible way. A survey of National Abortion Federation members showed only 4% follow FDA guidelines, and Planned Parenthood is the biggest culprit. It owns 158 of 175, or 90%, of all known chemical abortion facilities in the U.S.

    Telemed abortion of RU-486 mifepristoneAccording to court documents, Planned Parenthood commits RU-486 abortions up to 63 days from the first day of a pregnant mother’s last period.

    It gives only one 200 mg tablet orally at the abortion clinic, then instructs the woman to take one 200 mcg Cytotec at home by letting it dissolve under her tongue (getting into the system faster than if swallowed).

    Worse, Planned Parenthood has lately been trying to do all this via telemed – dispensing chemical abortion drugs via remote computer, so the abortionist never comes in contact with the patient.

    The pro-abortion claim that “off-label” use of drugs is commonplace is disingenuous, because the pathway by which RU-486 was approved placed it in a restricted category.

    Abortion industry’s cash cow

    RU-486 is the abortion industry’s new cash cow business model, as verified by the surge of Planned Parenthood’s chemical abortion business. A 2014 Guttmacher report indicated that while abortion dropped 13% in 2011, the percentage of chemical abortions increased by 20% from three years earlier, to account for 22.6% of all abortions.

    Abortion clinics are obviously trying to cut corners. And safety be damned because, as Americans United for Life attorney Mailee Smith noted:

    Eight. That’s the number of women who have died from a severe bacterial infection following use of RU-486. In all eight cases, the women were instructed to use the abortion drugs in a way that has not been approved by the FDA.

    Zero. That’s the number of women who have died from a severe bacterial infection after using RU-486 in the way approved by the FDA.

    [tweet_box]8 women have died using RU486 per off-label abortion clinic protocol. 0 have died using FDA protocol[/tweet_box]

    AUL has written model legislation that forces abortion clinics to comply with FDA protocol on RU-486 drug administration.

    Four states have thus far passed legislation based on AUL’s language: Arizona, North Dakota, Ohio, and Oklahoma.

    The abortion industry has sued to block all four laws. To date the federal 5th and 6th Circuit Court of Appeals have both ruled in our favor, and the 9th Circuit has ruled in the other side’s favor.

    This gives us a “circuit split,” making it more likely the Supreme Court will weigh in.

    Supreme Court precedent satisfied

    Smith cited three reasons AUL is “confident” the language AUL has encouraged states to adopt falls well within Supreme Court precedent for both the Casey and Gonzales decisions:

    1. The first so-called right at issue is the right of a woman to make the ultimate decision to have an abortion, and the regulation of chemical abortion does not interfere with that.

    2. The court has said state legislatures are given wide discretion to legislate when there is medical uncertainty over a procedure or regulation. Here we know the unapproved use of RU-486 regimen has been tied to eight deaths. The other side argues that the off-label use did not cause those deaths. What’s important here is the cause is unknown. That is what creates the medical uncertainty.

    3. In Gonzales the court upheld the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban in part because there were other commonly used methods still available. If the regulation of chemical abortion means a woman cannot have one because she’s past gestational dates, she still has the option of surgical abortion. Surgical abortion is the most common method, and there is peer-reviewed evidence it’s safer than chemical abortion.

    Were SCOTUS to uphold chemical abortion regulations, more state legislatures would be encouraged to regulate them, making abortions harder for the industry to commit.

    [Screenshot of telemed abortion in Iowa via]

    Who Is Jill Stanek?

    Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.

    Read Jill's full bio »
    What the Media says »

  • May 2016
  • December 2015
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005

  • Categories