RU-486

Paper Summary:

This paper takes the position that RU-486 should not be distributed freely to women. Though RU-486 is touted as a miracle pill that allows women to terminate early pregnancies, the procedure is actually more complicated and involves at least three visits to the clinics. The paper shows that apart from the slim possibility that the RU-486 may not be effective, there are short-term side-effects that endanger the women?s lives, such as excessive bleeding and pain. Furthermore, there are long-term medical complications that may affect future pregnancies. The paper shows that with the availability of RU-486 that can be offered by family practitioners in all medical facilities, the number of abortions will increase. The paper argues that, ultimately, one has to consider the effects RU-486 on the morality of a society that condones the elimination of potential life.

From the Paper:

"In the United States, amidst opposition by anti-abortion politicians and the lack of support from big pharmaceutical companies, RU-486 was not even provisionally approved by the FDA for almost a decade (Talbot 40). In spite of the fervent attempts of feminists who organized protests outside Hoechst (the parent company of Roussel) factories and sent representatives to Paris, Hoechst was unwilling to jeopardize the business of their other products by entering the fiery abortion debate raging in the United States (Talbot 40). Finally, Roussel offered the U.S. rights for manufacturing the drug to the Population Council, a non-profit organization based in New York (Talbot 41). In addition, the Danco group, a small pharmaceutical company, has claimed that it has the financial backing of investors to manufacture the drug within the next 6 months (Talbot 40)."

More papers on RU-486:

• Case Study # 69990 : "RU 486"
• Analytical Essay # 23886 : "RU 486"
• Analytical Essay # 54183 : "RU-486"
• Persuasive Essay # 27846 : "Abortion: Ethical and Political Issues of RU 486"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: