Here’s a Tech Fix That Makes Abortions a Lot Easier to Get

A Maine clinic takes a big step to expand cheap and safe reproductive care to rural women.

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-232890118/">Rocketclips, Inc.</a>/Shutterstock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


A Maine reproductive health organization announced on Monday that it will immediately begin formally offering abortion services through a videoconferencing system. The move makes Maine one of just three states where physicians routinely provide abortion drugs remotely. Abortion rights advocates have long pushed for the practice, excited by its potential to vastly improve access to reproductive health care for women in remote corners of the country.

Before today, the provider, Maine Family Planning, mostly offered abortions in its Augusta clinic. “Maine is a very rural state. Some of our patients were traveling three or four hours,” says Leah Coplon, director of abortion services at MFP. Now she and her colleagues will offer medication-based abortions at 17 of their facilities across the state, which could dramatically cut travel times and expenses for patients. “Women without resources should still have access to basic health care,” Coplon says.

Twenty-three percent of women getting abortions do so with medication. After a physician prescribes two separate drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol, they take the first at the doctor’s office and go home to finish the regimen. The method, which can be used during the first nine weeks of pregnancy, is safe, relatively cheap, and noninvasive.

But medication abortion is often out of reach for the millions of women who live in the large swaths of the country with no abortion provider and who can’t take time off work, find child care, or travel—sometimes hundreds of miles—to reach a clinic. That’s where telemedicine comes in: Using a phone and a videoconferencing system, a physician trained in abortions at one clinic can safely prescribe drugs to a woman at another clinic, under the care of a nurse or a non-OB-GYN doctor, across the state. In Iowa, where telemedicine abortion has been around for just less than 10 years, after videoconferencing with the patient, physicians can even remotely unlock a cabinet holding the medication at the patient’s location.

“From a public-health perspective, [telemedicine] does improve access to early abortion [and] decreases later abortion,” Dan Grossman, a doctor and researcher who has studied telemedicine, told The Atlantic. “And that would result in improved health outcomes.”

Still, until today, Iowa and Minnesota were the only states with clinics offering telemedicine abortion. Whole Woman’s Health, the Texas abortion organization that’s a defendant in the Supreme Court case being heard this week, briefly offered telemedicine services in 2008, but the state Legislature quickly banned the practice. Eighteen states, including Texas, have banned telemedicine abortion by requiring that the prescribing physician be in the same room as the woman seeking services.

In many other states, providers have opted out of expanding telemedicine because of anti-abortion political pressure, or because the rollout is too expensive: clinics without prescribing physicians present still need staff with extensive training and ultrasound equipment to verify the presence of a pregnancy before proceeding.

Cost concerns previously kept MFP, a nonprofit, from implementing telemedicine. But after receiving a number of privately funded grants (in Maine, abortions can’t be funded with any state or federal dollars), the organization spent more than a year readying the launch, including conducting a small beta program. Until today, only three of 16 Maine counties had an abortion clinic. With MFP’s telemedicine practice now in place, the number of clinics offering abortion in the state has risen from three to 20.

“We’ve had great success in the sense that women have been so appreciative that we’re expanding,” says Coplon. “I hope that more and more providers recognize this as something they can incorporate.”

This article has been revised.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate