Mifepristone – Opinions

Sept. 5, Carliss Chatman, law professor at Dedman School of Law, SMU Dallas, for a piece pointing out how the Texas ban on the abortion pill could have a negative impact on life-saving telemedicine healthcare channels and prescription delivery. Published in The Hill under the heading How the Texas ban on mifepristone could jeopardize telemedicine for everyone: http://tinyurl.com/2ntve4j4

Telemedicine’s expansion during the pandemic minimized exposure and addressed the problem of health care deserts.

Roughly 20 percent of Americans live in rural areas and too often must travel long distances to receive health care. The National Rural Health Association reports the “patient-to-primary care physician ratio in rural areas is only 39.8 physicians per 100,000 people, compared to 53.3 physicians per 100,000 in urban areas.” But during the pandemic, technology, including telephone and video, bridged the care gap, allowing patients to receive critical treatment and prescriptions.

Continue reading “How the Texas ban on mifepristone could jeopardize telemedicine for everyone”

August 22, Rhonda Garelick, distinguished professor of English and journalism at SMU Dallas, for an op-ed examining Judge James Ho’s (U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals) ruling in favor of further restriction on mifepristone, the abortion pill. Published in the Los Angeles Times under the heading The abortion pill faces its most disturbing attack yet: https://tinyurl.com/5n7damuf

Judge James Ho of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote an opinion last week that attracted a lot of attention. A three-judge panel that included Ho ruled in favor of further restrictions on access to mifepristone, the abortion pill, which will remain widely available under a Supreme Court order while litigation continues. But Ho also wrote a separate opinion contending that medical providers could further challenge the drug on the grounds of “aesthetic injury,” a concept he borrowed, strangely, from environmental law.

In what seemed a baffling argument, Ho wrote, “Unborn babies are a source of profound joy for those who view them. Expectant parents eagerly share ultrasound photos with loved ones. Friends and family cheer at the sight of an unborn child. Doctors delight in working with their unborn patients — and experience an aesthetic injury when they are aborted.”

Continue reading “The abortion pill faces its most disturbing attack yet”