Thursday, May 01, 2014

Women on Waves Study Shows Many Women Still Needed Surgical Intervention After Chemical Abortion

This is an abstract of 4 studies, produced by Rebecca Gomperts of Women on Waves, an organization that distributes abortion pills in countries where abortion is illegal.

From the first study:

Sixteen of the 265 (6.0%) women who provided follow-up information reported that they did not use the medication. Of the remaining 249 women who did the medical abortion at home, 13.6% reported having a surgical intervention afterwards and 1.6% reported a continuing pregnancy. After the follow up rate increased from 54.8% to 77.6% of the cases, 12.6% of the women reported they did not take the medication and only 6.8% of the women having the medical abortion at home underwent a surgical intervention afterwards.

So at first, 15% of the women in the sample had a failed procedure. Only when they increased their follow up rate (kinda sounds biased, but okay) seven per cent had to have surgical intervention.

This is success?

And what happens if they cannot access that all-important surgical intervention?

The numbers seemed to be reproduced in other areas. From Study 2:

Study 2 explored the factors that influence the surgical intervention rate after home medical abortion provided through Women on Web to women with a pregnancy up to 9 weeks. Of the 2323 women who did the medical abortion, 289 (12.4%) received a surgical intervention. High rates were found in Eastern Europe (14.8%), Latin America (14.4%) and Asia/Oceania (11.0%) and low rates in Western Europe (5.8%), the Middle East (4.7%) and Africa (6.1%; ii p=0.000). More interventions were carried out when women had a longer gestational age (p=0.000). Women without a surgical intervention reported satisfaction with the treatment more frequently (p=0.000). 

This is supposed to be success!

Nothing is said about women who can't get treatment after their abortions.

The 3rd study is a little more disturbing:

  Study 3 evaluated the need for and outcome of self-administered medical abortion in Brazil, provided through telemedicine. Of the 370 women used the medicines, 307 women provided follow-up information about the outcome of the medical abortion. Of this group, 207 (67.4%) of the women were up to 9 weeks pregnant, 71 (23.1%) were 10, 11 or 12 weeks pregnant, and 29 (9.5%) of the women were at least 13 weeks pregnant. There was a significant difference in surgical intervention rates after the medical abortion at the different gestations (19.3% at <9 weeks, 15.5% at 10-12 weeks and 44.8% at >13 weeks, p=0.06). However, 42.2% of the women who had received a surgical intervention afterwards did not have any symptoms of a complication.
13 weeks pregnant! In a telemedicine setting! Holy malpractice, Batman! Check out the numbers-- 45% of women needed intervention after 13 weeks. They must have known this could have been a result-- and they did it any way? This is responsible? How can abortion advocates sanction such behaviour? The dosage needed to terminate that kind of pregnancy is normally only available in a hospital precisely because complications are so dire and common!

UPDATE: I missed the link to the actual study.

I'm only a layperson, but I cannot believe this is not considered medical malpractice.