RU-486 expected to be FDA approved
Abortion in a bottle will change the verbiage, but not the principles in the life-and-death debate
From, The Kentucky Citizen Digest, January/February, 2001.

When the Clinton administration promised to preserve and expand choices for women seeking abortions, few realized exactly the kinds of choices he was talking about. Prior to 1992, federal executive policy largely discouraged abortion. Outlawed were abortion-inducing drugs, tests using aborted fetal tissue and abortions performed on military bases. But with the stroke of a pen, executive orders quickly changed those long-standing policies.

Introduction of the abortifacient RU-486 into specific test markets in the mid-90s was perhaps the policy change which most impacts the way abortions would be done in the future. It also proved pivotal for the spin-off of other controversial abortifacients such as Preven. These drugs have already brought debate and controversy to Kentucky.

RU-486, widely used in Europe to induce abortions at five to nine weeks in pregnancy — often with serious side-effects — is expected to be fully approved by the Food and Drug Administration and ready for introduction into the United States as early as this summer.

Preven, on the other hand, has been available in the U.S. since 1998 when the FDA requested Gynétics, a women’s healthcare company based in New Jersey, to develop an emergency contraceptive drug. It is the only available product specifically labeled and marketed for emergency contraception in the U.S.

Abortion proponents call the drug “emergency contraception” since it is supposed to be used with three days of unprotected sex. But those with pro-life convictions claim that it acts as an abortifacient since it doesn’t prevent pregnancy but rather prevents implantation of a fertilized egg.

The possibility of the latter has  resulted in the categorization of Preven as an abort-ifacient. “Preven is cut from the same cloth as RU-486,” says Richard Nelson, policy analyst for The Family Foundation. “While the drugs are designed differently and used at different times in pregnancy, the results are the same—the death of an unborn child.”

Consequently, numerous pharmacies including the nation’s largest — Wal-mart refused to stock the drug. The decision resulted in praise from the pro-life community, while Planned Parenthood staged a media campaign criticizing Wal-mart.

According to Wal-Mart CEO David Glass in a 1999 press release, “We’re a family store... we try to have something for everyone.” But Preven was not one of those things.

The discount-store giant emphasized that the decision was purely economic and not a moral judgment on the drug. “We don’t want to be America’s moral conscience,” says Don Soderquist, senior vice chairman. “The watchword for all of our people is ‘Do what is right.’ That’s what we really preach and teach and we want, but there’s so much gray.”

Gray or not, pro-lifers clearly view this move as good business policy for Wal-mart.
 

Key Family Foundation Contacts: Kent Ostrander, Executive Director Martin Cothran, Senior Associate Policy Analyst