American innovation and freedom have long made our health system the envy (and “medical travel” destination) of the world. But some new technologies challenge both medical ethics and the respected patient-physician relationship. In a recent New York Times article, a method known as TeleMedicine (medical consultation and administration done via video conferencing) was explained, with one particularly shocking application. Consider the following scenario:
You’re pregnant and terrified. You have to make the problem disappear and know the one place you can go for “help.” You enter the local Planned Parenthood, fill out some information, get an appointment for your procedure and leave. Upon your return, you sit in a room with a video screen and a doctor in a remote location speaks. Then, remarkably, a drawer is triggered open, and your prescription is made available for administration. You take the pill, listen to some final medical advice from the screen and are on your way. With brilliant efficiency, your panacea was delivered and your burden lifted. In Iowa, with the same amount of expediency, attention and, perhaps, forethought it takes to get you through the McDonald’s drive-thru for a McNugget fix, you can end a human life.
Essentially, a woman may now bypass meeting with an actual physician to receive Mifepristone, formerly known as RU-486, to end their unwanted pregnancy. While video conferencing is currently used in other medical settings, the Iowa chapter of Planned Parenthood is the first to use the technology to provide one of the already most widely used abortifacients available. According to the NYT article:
Advocates say the idea offers an answer to an essential struggle that has long troubled those who favor abortion rights: How to make abortions available in far-flung, rural places and communities where abortion providers are unable or unwilling to travel. So far only Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa use this method, but around the country, abortion providers have begun asking how they might replicate the concept.
An “essential struggle” to make killing humans easier, in more places, faster! Now without even bothering to have the physical presence of a doctor there for administration. Are we not compassionate? Are we not…enlightened? After reading Peter “Infanticide Advocate” Singer’s recent piece extolling the virtues of (forced) sterilization for the sake of the planet, linking the history and eugenic ambitions of Planned Parenthood to a future dystopia isn’t all that difficult.
It should surprise none of us that Planned Parenthood is at the forefront of removing yet another barrier, the actual attending physician, in their lust for further “abortion care.” Many of us have long lamented the ease with which Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers facilitate death, to say nothing of their unethical and illegal tendencies. Yet their desire to extend their reach to more individuals without even the physical presence of an attending physician confirms the worst stereotypes of a business already built on ending lives.