Amicus Brief Urging Fifth Circuit to Protect Access to Mifepristone
PRH’s amicus brief urges the Fifth Circuit to protect remote access to mifepristone and preserve patient autonomy.
OVERVIEW
On July 22, 206, Physicians for Reproductive Health, represented by Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, filed an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The brief explains why in-person dispensing for mifepristone is medically unnecessary and places a dangerous burden on patients across the country.
PRH physician advocates Drs. Olivia Manayan, Aishat Olatunde, Avanthi Jayaweera, Emma Trawick, Bhaskari Burra, Tal Lee, Benjamin Brown, and Rachel Jensen provided firsthand perspectives that highlight how access to mifepristone both in-person and via telehealth is medically essential and lifesaving.
The brief states:
“The inability to remotely access medication for abortion care and miscarriage management will constrain patients’ autonomy in deciding where, when, and how to manage their pregnancies and pregnancy losses, and will further erode physicians’ ability to provide preferred care to their patients, undermining physicians’ ability to exercise their judgment and core medical ethics principles.”
“Removing remote access to mifepristone threatens patient health and autonomy. The physicians interviewed confirm that limiting their ability to dispense mifepristone remotely can cause medical harm when the patient is seeking a medication abortion in a life-threatening situation, especially if the patient is unable to access in-person abortion care due to geographic barriers or personal circumstances. ”
“Physicians are ethically obligated to respect patient autonomy by ‘acknowledg[ing] an individual’s right to hold views, to make choices, and to take actions based on her own personal values and beliefs,’ but requiring in-person dispensing of mifepristone on a nationwide basis would undermine that obligation by removing a safe and effective option from their toolkit.”