Yes Renate, you are right to point out the terrible aspects of ‘medical’/chemical abortion (RU 486).

But then you don’t seem to blink an eye when the woman whom you cite who had a bad RU 486 experience said, “the sheer amount of time it took for me to 'terminate' my baby” and “a reminder of the fact I was terminating a baby, for which I felt hugely saddened.”

RU 486 is undoubtedly bad for women but it is far worse for the baby that is deliberately killed by it, as this woman openly acknowledged.

But she is just as hypocritical as you Renate: both of you are effectively saying, don’t hurt women but kill your baby if you want to.

What a double standard.

Life is full of risks and unpalatable side effects.
If you're gluten intolerant, then eating bread can have unpalatable side effects, ditto milk if you're lactose intolerant.
Some people can be killed by something as relatively harmless as a bee sting! Untreated dental conditions can contribute to a heart attack or worse?
And on the table procedures under a general, are not without risk; and can and sometimes do, result in unintended side effects or fatalities, rare though they may well be.
One assumes that RU 486, could put some/many abortion clinics out of business or render them financially non-viable?
And therefore, on the basis of self evident self interest, they are more likely to spruik all the disadvantages of the much cheaper and comparatively safe alternative.
On the plus side, is the anonymity for women embarrassed or seriously inconvenienced by their condition? Perhaps someone considering holy orders, and subjected to date rape and rohipnol?
Or girls still at school and not wanting to destroy all their future career prospects and the money already committed to their education?
There's also the question of cost.
A high school senior may be able to scrap up $39.00 for a script, but may find the much more expensive, on the table procedure entirely unaffordable?
But particularly, if as a young consenting adult, she decides to keep her parents out of the loop?
Or in a small rural community or village, the entire unmentionable unprintable town?
Moreover, we are talking about a doctors prescription and proper medical management; and indeed, an informed decision.
If the only other real alternative is a backyard butcher, then I know what my advice would be!
Given that is so, and in light of all the foregoing, I find this article and advocacy, completely without merit!
Even so, at the end of the day, it still remains all about informed choice and an adult's decision!
Rhrosty.

There are many abortion procedures available
and women need to consult with their health care
providers to find out what is right for them.

Most women can have a medication abortion safely.

Of course all medical procedures have some risks
however most often complications are simple to
treat with medicine or other treatments.

The risk of death from medication abortion is much less
then from a full-term pregnancy or childbirth.

Listen to your health-care provider who will advise what's
right for you. Nowadays there are many options open
to help women make (or not) the choice that is right
for them.

When a pro-abortion supporter comes out and states " RU 486 comes with potent and unpalatable 'side effects'", there is good reason to believe her. Of course, she is not the first to point that out.

The TGA's duty is to not approve drugs that damage peoples' health and wellbeing. The TGA effectively is in breach of its charter and being grossly unethical in approving use of RU486, the drug cocktail that is designed to kill the fetus.

Now, the Health Minister is being unethical by proposing that prescription of RU486 be subsidised by the PBS. She insults our intelligence by claiming that, by substantially reducing the price of RU486 so as to make it available to more women, the number of abortions would not increase. It is another instance of misrepresentation by a member of the Gillard Government.

Taxpayers should not be called on to provide funding for the abhorrent practise of killing unborn babies, nor for prescribing use of RU486 that comes with potent and palatable side effects for women.

Dear raycom,

Women are taxpayers too, and there are side effects to
any medication or medical procedure. A health professional
is the person to seek advice in each individual case.
Being pregnant and childbirth is not risk free either.

I'm not sure if they are the same thing but this article may be of interest in context with this discussion.

http://m.apnews.mobi/ap/db_6776/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=7WkiK4v7

"FDA: Morning-after pill OK for ages 15 and up"

R0bert