USCCB Pro-life Chair Slams FDA for Approving Abortion Drug Ella as 'Emergency Contraception'

The manufacturers of such drugs often hide the abortifacient effect (which can also occur with the Plan B morning-after pill), claiming that the drugs cannot terminate a pregnancy. However, such companies define pregnancy as beginning at implantation, not at conception, which is when human life begins.

WASHINGTON, DC (LifeSiteNews.com) - The chairman of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities voiced "grave concern" to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over its move toward approving a new drug, which pro-life leaders say would induce early abortions, as an "emergency contraceptive." In a June 17 letter to Dr. Margaret Hamburg, Commissioner of the FDA, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston criticized the FDA's move to hold an advisory committee meeting on the drug Ulipristal, sold under the brand name Ella, "without broad public input or a full record on the drug's safety for women or their unborn children." An FDA advisory panel on Thursday unanimously approved the drug, which is advertised as effective if taken up to five days after intercourse, as emergency contraception. The drug works by blocking the hormone progesterone, which would prevent a woman's egg from being released; however, this would also prevent an already-conceived embryo from implanting in the woman's uterine lining, causing the unborn child to starve to death.

The manufacturers of such drugs often hide the abortifacient effect (which can also occur with the Plan B morning-after pill), claiming that the drugs cannot terminate a pregnancy. However, such companies define pregnancy as beginning at implantation, not at conception, which is when human life begins. The cardinal raised concerns that Ulipristal is more similar in effect to the drug RU-486, which can cause abortions several weeks into pregnancy, than it is to other emergency contraceptives, which are believed to have no post-implantation effects. "Millions of American women, even those willing to use a contraceptive to prevent fertilization in various circumstances, would personally never choose to have an abortion," said Cardinal DiNardo. "They would be ill served by a misleading campaign to present Ulipristal simply as a 'contraceptive.' "In fact," he continued, "FDA approval for that purpose would likely make the drug available for 'off-label' use simply as an abortion drug - including its use by unscrupulous men with the intent of causing an early abortion without a woman's knowledge or consent. Such abuses have already occurred in the case of RU-486, despite its warning labels and limited distribution." Cardinal DiNardo went on to cite the support of this administration, as well as previous administrations, for federal laws ensuring no one is involved in an abortion without his or her knowledge or consent. He also cited the Obama Administration's rationale for supporting broad access to contraceptives as a means of reducing abortions. "Plans for approving a known abortion-causing drug as a 'contraceptive' for American women is not consistent with the stated policy of the Administration on these matters," the cardinal wrote. Other pro-life leaders have already spoken out against the new drug. Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America told FOX News that "women will buy it thinking it's a morning-after pill when in fact, it is an abortion pill."

---

LifeSiteNews.com is a non-profit Internet service dedicated to issues of culture, life, and family. It was launched in September 1997. LifeSiteNews Daily News reports and information pages are used by numerous organizations and publications, educators, professionals and political, religious and life and family organization leaders and grassroots people across North America and internationally.