Over 20 years since the FDA approved the commonly used abortion pill mifepristone, its safety is being put into question before the Supreme Court — and the verdict could result in a nationwide end to
According to the Guttmacher Institute, 63% of abortions were done through pills like mifepristone and misoprostol in 2023. These two pills, often used together, can terminate an early pregnancy without surgery. Less than 1% of women have gone to the hospital due to adverse effects from mifepristone, and the FDA saw fit to expand access to the pill in 2016 and 2021. However, the
Read more:
Essentially, AHM has to prove that members of their group have been injured due to mifepristone access. Namely, that these providers were forced to complete an abortion they didn't ethically agree with because a woman experiencing a rare emergency after taking mifepristone came to them seeking care.
"A ruling against mifepristone access could strike another severe blow against abortion rights and access," says Dr. Mary Jacobson, OB-GYN, clinical associate professor at Stanford University and chief medical officer at women's health provider Hello Alpha. "A precedent to interfere with the expertise of the FDA could jeopardize access to a wide range of FDA-approved medicines and adversely impact public health in the United States."
Dr. Jacobson underlines just how catastrophic a ruling against the FDA could be, noting that courts are supposed to defer to the FDA's expertise when dealing with cases under the agency's jurisdiction. Beyond abortion care being severely restricted in all states, other medications used in reproductive health and fertility care could be at risk. Dr. Jacobson encourages employers to pay close attention to not just this ruling, but cases at the state level. They will need all the legal help they can get to ensure their healthcare benefits can actually care for their employees in an increasingly volatile political landscape, she stresses.
Read more:
"Employers need to be familiar with the shifting sands of state laws, seek legal counsel with expertise in abortion law, and partner with [telehealth] groups such as the Reproductive Health Initiative for Telehealth Equity and Solutions," she says. "With these tools, employers will be advocates for their employees in ways that provide employees with full access to reproductive care. Abortions, IVF and gender-affirming care are part of healthcare, not carve-outs."
Employers' healthcare benefits goals should center around expanding access to reproductive healthcare without being in the line of legal fire from anti-abortion laws. This means working with third-party organizations that can connect employees to resources that may otherwise be unavailable in their state.
Read more:
Dr. Jacobson does not think the Supreme Court will rule against mifepristone in this case, but she knows the court isn't predictable either. As abortion travel bans become a possibility in red states and IVF comes under threat after the Alabama Supreme Court extended personhood to embryos, it's clear reproductive care is already facing limitations. Dr. Jacobson encourages employers to make it clear where they stand.
"People stand to lose freedom of thought and further restrictions on choice," she says. "We are in threat of losing our democracy."
