•  
  •  
 

Belmont Law Review

Abstract

This Note examines the legal, medical, and ethical controversy surrounding abortion pill reversal (APR), a protocol involving the administration of progesterone after ingestion of mifepristone in an attempt to counteract a medication abortion. After outlining the scientific and regulatory history of mifepristone, misoprostol, and progesterone, the Note surveys emerging state legislation that either mandates disclosure of APR as part of informed consent or prohibits the practice altogether. It analyzes the debate within the frameworks of off-label prescribing, medical malpractice, informed consent doctrine, and right-to-try laws. The Note argues that if abortion is legally protected as an exercise of reproductive autonomy, then a woman who changes her mind after initiating a medication abortion should likewise retain the legal right to attempt reversal. Accordingly, the author contends that states should protect access to progesterone therapy and require abortion providers to disclose reversal as part of informed consent, grounding this position in principles of patient autonomy, professional responsibility, and state interests in ensuring informed medical decision-making.

Download

Share

COinS