Anna Quindlen, in her call for a “girlcott” to support RU-486 (Op-Ed, March 9), neglected to mention a few disturbing facts about the French abortion pill. In France, the drug treatment requires several visits to an abortion clinic and requires close medical attention.
Ms. Quindlen argued that the drug-induced “hormonal shift” would be “less disturbing to some than later surgical intervention,” but in the instances where RU-486 is effective, the mother must see the 3/4-inch-long baby to know she has aborted. Even Roussel President Edouard Sakiz has said this is an appalling psychological ordeal.
In the instances where RU-486 is ineffective (20 to 40 percent of the cases), Roussel-Uclaf requires a later surgical abortion because carrying a surviving baby to term carries with it a high probability of birth defects. She also neglected to mention side-effects of the drug such as heavy bleeding.
What really seems to bother Ms. Quindlen is that very few anti-abortion activists in America are radicals that torch, wage chemical warfare or even kill an abortionist.
Instead, most who are against abortion are actually rational Americans who are ready and willing to organize their masses and use their “dollar votes” to successfully boycott a company: Americans who have thoughtfully decided that killing people, whether born or unborn, seen or unseen, is wrong.
