To the Editor:
Re “Abortion Drugs Given in Iowa via Video Link” (front page, June 9):
You write that pregnant women in Iowa “have a choice” between traveling to a clinic or receiving the abortion drugs dispensed remotely by a doctor in another city through teleconferencing. But abortion by virtual encounter versus abortion by in-person clinic visit isn’t much of a choice.
Setting aside for the moment very real concerns about “telemedical” RU-486 abortions — authentic informed consent, necessary access to follow-up medical care and paltry support for women who find the at-home procedure more difficult than they anticipated — women deserve better than abortion by any means.
No drug, technology or surgical procedure will ever provide what many women seeking abortions are all too often desperate for: a creative way to move forward in life without resorting to the violent choice of abortion.
Deirdre A. McQuade
Washington, June 11, 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
More on the abortion-by-video controversy
Deirdre McQuade, assistant director for policy and communications for the USCCB's Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, takes on the issue of abortions being performed via video link (see our earlier post on that subject HERE), in the letters section of yesterday's New York Times. Here's what she had to say:
Posted by Mary DeTurris Poust at 5:09 PM