Who's stockpiling abortion pills amid bans
A growing number of people are requesting abortion medications before they're pregnant, a shift driven in part by fears of future abortion bans, a study led by a University of Washington researcher suggests.
Why it matters: The number of states enforcing near-total abortion bans since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022 has varied, but as of this month, 41 states have either restrictions on abortions after a certain point in pregnancy or near total bans, according to the Guttmacher Institute.
Driving the news: The study published this month in the Journal of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists found that the option to order abortion pills in advance of need was being used more by people who already had fewer barriers to abortion access.
What they did: Researchers analyzed medical records from more than 20,000 patients across 25 states who received abortion pills via the telehealth service Aid Access between August 2021 and March 2023.
They compared people who ordered pills in case they might need them later with those who were already pregnant and seeking an abortion.
What they found: Advance provision users were mostly white (72%), child-free (80%) and living in metro areas, not lower-resource counties, per the study.
Among them, 70% said they feared future legal restrictions, the study found.
Orders spiked during political moments like Roe v. Wade's reversal or major media coverage, said lead author Anna Fiastro, a researcher in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Washington School of Medicine.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a day ago
- The Hill
Trump stokes fear, confusion with pulled emergency abortion guidance
The Trump administration sowed confusion and fear among physicians with its move this past week to rescind Biden-era guidelines to hospitals that provide life-saving abortions. While the move doesn't change the law, doctors and reproductive-rights advocates fear it will have a chilling effect on health care workers in states with abortion bans, ultimately harming pregnant women. Earlier this past week, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced they would rescind guidance issued during the Biden administration, which reinforced to hospitals that under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA,) abortions qualify as stabilizing care in medical emergencies. Emergency rooms in states with abortion bans have been struggling since the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade to understand when they can legally provide emergency abortions. After President Trump pulled the Biden-era guidance seeking to clarify that question, emergency room doctors will experience 'more confusion' and 'more fear,' according to health and legal experts who spoke with The Hill. 'Clinicians are scared to provide basic medical care, and this care is clearly in line with medical ethics … medical standards of care, and they're being put in this situation where they can't win,' said Payal Shah, director of research, legal and advocacy at Physicians for Human Rights. Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, at least 13 states have enacted near-total abortion bans, according to data from the Guttmacher Institute. There are exceptions in these states when continuing a pregnancy poses a threat to the health or life of the mother. However, most of the language in state laws is unclear on how that determination is made, resulting in instances of emergency rooms denying care. Doctors in states like Idaho, Texas and Tennessee have filed lawsuits requesting that lawmakers clarify when an abortion is allowed to save the life of a pregnant person. The doctors and patients involved in the lawsuits argue that state laws do not adequately protect pregnant patients in emergencies. Many of these states have severe punishments for doctors who violate abortion bans, like steep fines and prison time. 'For clinicians, there is actually no safe way to navigate this in this moment, and ultimately, that's how these laws are designed,' Shah said. 'They're designed to cause chaos and confusion. They're often written in ways that don't use medical terminology.' Without clear guidance, pregnant women suffer and sometimes die, as ProPublica has reported. One striking example of this is the 2023 case of Kyleigh Thurman, a Texas woman who was repeatedly denied care for a nonviable pregnancy after days of experiencing bleeding and pain. Health care workers discovered that she had an ectopic pregnancy, which is when a fertilized egg implants and begins to grow outside of the uterus, usually in a fallopian tube. Ectopic pregnancies are never viable and are life-threatening if not treated properly. It wasn't until her OB/GYN 'pleaded to hospital staff that she be given care,' that the hospital administered a shot ending her pregnancy, according to a complaint filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of Thurman. The shot came too late, and the ectopic pregnancy ruptured Thurman's right fallopian tube, which was then removed. 'If a patient is actively hemorrhaging or experiencing an ectopic pregnancy which is also life-threatening, doctors need that clear guidance that yes, EMTALA applied,' said Autumn Katz, associate director of U.S. litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights. A federal investigation into Thurman's case found that the Texas hospital violated EMTALA, according to a recent letter from the CMS. 'I finally got some justice,' Thurman said in a statement. 'I hope this decision will do some good in encouraging hospitals to help women in situations like mine.' Hospitals that violate EMTALA are subject to heavy fines and, in some extreme cases, risk losing a portion of their Medicare and Medicaid hospital funding, according to the National Institutes of Health. Former President Biden leaned on the law to preserve access to emergency abortion across the country, leading to a legal fight with Idaho, which has a strict abortion ban. The Supreme Court last year dismissed the case, declining to rule on the merits of a politically charged case. The rescinding of these guidelines also means hospitals that violate the law will likely not be investigated as often as they were under previous administrations, according to Shah. That lack of punitive risk means that hospitals could be incentivized to deny life-saving care for patients. 'The standard of EMTALA is pretty high,' said Katherine Hempstead, senior policy adviser at Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. 'This kind of takes that layer of reassurance away, and it will make a lot of providers feel very vulnerable.'
Gizmodo
3 days ago
- Gizmodo
Four Democrat-Led States Ask FDA to Lift Restrictions on Abortion Pill
The attorneys general of four Democrat-led states—New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California—petitioned the Food and Drug Administration on Thursday, June 5, asking the agency to lift what they view as unnecessary restrictions on the abortion pill mifepristone. The petition aims to force the FDA to acknowledge robust clinical evidence and decades of mifepristone use that support the drug's safety and efficacy. The move comes just one month after Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told Congress that he ordered a safety review of the abortion pill. An FDA spokesperson confirmed plans for the review in a statement to CBS News on Tuesday, June 3. According to the FDA, mifepristone, approved by the regulator in 2000, is a drug that blocks the hormone progesterone, which is necessary for pregnancy to continue. It is most commonly used in combination with the drug misoprostol to terminate a pregnancy within 10 weeks of gestation. An analysis of 2023 data by the Guttmacher Institute found that medication abortions account for more than half (63%) of all abortions in the U.S. But in the years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, 17 states have banned this medication, and an additional 10 states have placed restrictions on it, according to the Washington Post. 'The medication is a lifeline for millions of women who need access to time-sensitive, critical healthcare—especially low-income women and those who live in rural and underserved areas,' California attorney general Rob Bonta told the Los Angeles Times. The petition specifically asks the FDA to lift the mifepristone Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program. This additional regulatory framework is designed to 'help ensure the benefits of the medication outweigh its risks,' according to the FDA. REMS has been applied to 325 medications since its inception and currently applies to 71 drugs. REMS places multiple restrictions on mifepristone use, including that prescribers be put on national and local abortion provider lists; patients give written statements that they intend to end their pregnancies; and pharmacies keep records of mifepristone prescribers and users. The attorneys general argue that these rules 'impose unnecessary and burdensome hurdles on patients, prescribers, pharmacists, and the healthcare system.' They also point out that mifepristone has been marketed in the U.S. for decades and has been safely used by more than 7.5 million American women. 'Moreover, no new evidence raising safety concerns has emerged in the last two decades,' they state. These states are not alone in their pursuit of expanded mifepristone access. Seventeen other Democratic-led or -leaning states, plus Washington D.C., are suing the FDA in Spokane, Washington, to loosen restrictions on the drug, Reuters reported in February. What's more, leading medical organizations have called on the FDA to remove REMS restrictions on mifepristone for years. If the FDA declines to remove REMS, Thursday's petition asks the agency to 'exercise its discretion not to enforce' some or all of the restrictions in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California, as these states already place 'rigorous restrictions' around the practice of medicine.
Boston Globe
3 days ago
- Boston Globe
Massachusetts joins three other Democrat-led states asking FDA to remove abortion pill restrictions
Advertisement Abortion pills — particularly mifepristone — have become the focus of legal battles and new legislation seeking to expand or further curtail access to the procedure since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, and with it, the national right to abortion. Thursday's petition comes days after FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said he would conduct a review of the drug, alarming reproductive health advocates who worry the agency is gearing up to further limit access. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, which includes the FDA, said HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had asked Makary to review mifepristone data. The spokesperson added that Makary 'will ensure gold standard science is used while incorporating practical, common-sense considerations to its regulatory processes.' Advertisement A large body of research shows mifepristone, first approved more than two decades ago, is safe and effective. It is used in the majority of abortions in the United States. The Democratic attorneys general asked the FDA to review the restrictions on mifepristone Thursday through a citizen petition submitted to HHS and the FDA. By law, the FDA is required to respond within 180 days of receiving the petition — granting, denying or dismissing it, or justifying why it has not reached a decision on the matter. In the month after a decision, petitioners can ask the FDA to reconsider. After that, they have the option to take the issue to court. The four attorneys general are asking the FDA to remove requirements under its Mifepristone Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program that mandate pharmacy certification, which involves using shippers that provide tracking and patient agreement forms for receiving the drug. They are also asking the FDA to remove prescriber certification requirements, saying the restrictions 'can discourage clinicians from offering it,' according to the petition. To prescribe mifepristone, clinicians have to send a certification form to the pharmacies their patients will visit to receive the drug. That process poses safety risks 'should such lists be leaked or compromised,' the petition says. Those risks for abortion providers are 'all the more prevalent now given the number of states that have criminalized abortion and are seeking to punish providers who have facilitated medication abortions for patients who reside in other states,' the petition says. It alludes to the first-of-its-kind prosecution this year of a New York doctor who allegedly prescribed abortion pills to a patient in Louisiana. Advertisement In a statement Thursday, James said these restrictions discourage many family medicine practices and primary care clinics from stocking or prescribing mifepristone, which particularly impacts 'rural and underserved communities' that have no alternative health-care options. According to the FDA, the Mifespristone REMS program is intended to 'mitigate the risk of serious complications' associated with the drug 'by, among other things, requiring that prescribers have the necessary qualifications to assess whether patients are appropriate candidates for the drug and to provide necessary intervention in case of complications (or have made plans to provide such care through others), ensuring that mifepristone is only dispensed by certified pharmacies or by or under the supervision of certified prescribers, and requiring that patients be informed of the risks of the treatment regimen.' Some Republicans have been pushing the FDA to reassess the safety of mifepristone, based on a study conducted by a conservative think tank that said it found the risk of serious adverse events from taking the drug is much higher than advertised. The study is not peer-reviewed and does not reveal the database used for it. The Washington Post Fact Checker analyzed the study, which was conducted by the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and noted that it found similar rates for the most serious problems associated with abortion, such as sepsis, infection, and emergency-room visits, as are listed on the FDA-approved label of Mifeprex, the brand name for the abortion pill. According to the FDA's prescribing information on mifepristone, fewer than 0.5 percent of people taking the drug with misoprostol to end pregnancy experienced serious adverse reactions. On Thursday, the attorneys general rebuked 'recent attempts to challenge mifepristone's safety using methodologically flawed scientific research papers, noting that several of these papers have been retracted by medical journals.' Advertisement 'The coalition are urging the FDA to use this full review of mifepristone to lift unjustified restrictions and maximize access to this essential medication,' James's statement said.
