Image credit: Goodreads.com
Dr. Delgado’s work in abortion pill reversal (APR) is justifiably the twenty-first century’s most significant advance for women’s health. No wonder abortion activists and those who profit from women being forced into abortion (the Democrat Party and the abortion business Planned Parenthood especially) would want to censor the international APR movement.
Delgado’s account of the success to reverse the disastrous effects of the abortion pill is eminently readable. Even the several pages of this 254-page work which discuss the pharmacology of progesterone countering the abortion pill are easy to understand. Thus, high school students, a target group of abortion activists, would benefit greatly from knowing how to reverse the abortion pill if the teenaged mother was unfortunate enough to have been forced into taking it.
Delgado, founder of the Abortion Pill Reversal Network (https://abortionpillreversal.com/), states his purposes for his research and for the book clearly: “Abortion pill reversal, or APR, gives women who have started the chemical abortion process a second chance at choice” (13). Women who have taken the first pill (mifepristone) in the two-step procedure to kill the unborn child chemically are told by abortion businesses (clinics and Planned Parenthood franchises) that the process is irreversible.
It is imperative, therefore, that women be informed that such a claim is an outrageous lie—a falsehood which would affect them after the abortion for years to come and which demonstrates that abortion businesses care more about the money they make than the women they supposedly “help”. The number of women who suffer from post-abortion syndrome (PAS) will increase substantially if current abortion trends continue, for “about 70 percent of all abortions in the United States are chemical abortions” (55).
And abortion, whether surgical or chemical, is still big business, especially for the abortion leviathan Planned Parenthood. Delgado writes that “22 percent of Planned Parenthood’s business-generated revenue came from abortion. That figure, 22 percent, is much more than the ‘tiny’ figure of 4.3 percent that Planned Parenthood reports” (57; internal quotes in original).
One can see easily understand the financial reasons why abortion businesses and agencies would promote chemical abortion instead of surgical methods. Delgado points out that,
Although the reimbursement for chemical abortions is less than for surgical abortions, the associated overhead is much less. There are fewer procedure rooms, fewer supplies, fewer recovery rooms, less malpractice insurance, and fewer physician salaries. Additionally, the number of chemical abortions per day could be significantly higher than the number of surgical abortions per day. (56)
Another unfortunate element about contemporary abortion is that it is still political, where one political party (the Democrats) uses it as a tool for its survival (billionaires who support the Democratic Party are pro-abortion) and control of government. The trail of Democratic Party activism against the first civil right to life and promotion of the abortion pill includes a litany of infamous pro-abortion names:
In the United States, abortion supporters, well connected to the Democratic Party, moved to have mifepristone approved. […] In his first week in office in January 1993, President Bill Clinton directed his administration to approve chemical abortion in the United States. […] The FDA was able to implement an accelerated approval process because it classified pregnancy as an illness instead of the normal physiologic reproductive process that it is and declared that chemical abortion provides a ‘meaningful therapeutic benefit’. […] In 2023, the State of California sued Heartbeat International. […] New York Attorney General Letitia James has sued Heartbeat International, CompassCare, and other providers of APR treatment in a case very similar to California’s attack on APR providers. […] The aggressive pro-abortion politics and abuse of the judicial system continue when those wedded to the pro-abortion agenda have power. (48-9, 53; internal quotes in original)
Despite Democrat Party machinations in the United States, Google censorship of APR information on its platform, and medical societies’ attacks on doctors who provide APR care to women, Delgado provides heartwarming accounts of women who successfully used APR to save themselves from being harmed and their unborn children from being killed by the abortion pill. The accounts provided by the women themselves are biographies that should be appreciated by every feminist as first-person accounts of women who overcame not only the propaganda from abortion zealots, but also threats from their lovers and other family members to force abortion on them.
A final remark is that Delgado is gracious to cite two other colleagues active in abortion pill reversal work and research: Dr. Matthew Harrison, the first physician to have successfully reversed the abortion pill (14), and Dr. Stephen Sammut, a scholar at Franciscan University of Steubenville (Ohio), about whom Delgado writes: “Dr. Sammut’s research has shown that progesterone truly does reverse an abortion that has already started, rather than preventing it, thus confirming that abortion pill reversal is an apt term for what we do” (46; italics in original).
Students writing research papers on the abortion pill as the latest battle in the fight to restore the first civil right to life may find the following quotes helpful. Unless otherwise noted, all quotes are from Delgado.
Quotable Quotes
“Whether you consider yourself pro-life, pro-choice, or pro-abortion, I think you will agree that the decision to have an abortion is one of the most difficult, emotionally charged decisions a person can make. Women in these situations often feel helpless and totally forlorn, boxed into a corner with only one obvious exit: abortion. Many feel pressured by others to abort. I have heard countless stories of husbands, boyfriends, ex-boyfriends, and even parents coercing women to abort or threatening to abandon them if they do not.” (17)
Regarding the moment when he realized how to reverse the abortion pill:
“The pregnant woman in Texas who had taken mifepristone was in a situation analogous to that of a pregnant woman with low progesterone who is at risk for miscarriage. In both situations, progesterone effects were low—in one case because progesterone was being blocked and in the other because progesterone levels were deficient. I quickly reasoned that I could give the woman [page 25] who wanted a second chance at choice supplemental progesterone to make up for the progesterone that was being blocked.” (24-5)
“As of June 2025, there are more than 1,400 doctors, other medical practitioners, and clinics in the Abortion Pill Rescue Network (APRN). We have helped women in all 50 states and in at least 93 other countries. Additionally, [page 32] there are now regional networks in Australia, Switzerland, Russia, and the United Kingdom.” (31-2)
“Women’s health and safety have been sacrificed for the sake of ideology and profit.” (58)
“While black people make up about 13 percent of the US population, around 39 percent of abortions are performed on Black women. Planned Parenthood’s Susan A. Cohen wrote in 2008, ‘This much is true: In the United States, the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women’”. (59)
“In 2025, USAID is in the crosshairs of the second Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency. Besides USAID’s role in promoting abortion, there are serious allegations of fraud, abuse, and having funded left-wing organizations.” (60)
“Slowly but surely, APR will become the standard of care. My goal is that in the future, a woman seeking a second chance at choice will simply call her primary physician or ob-gyn or visit the nearest emergency department to start the reversal process. It is safe and effective. It does not need to be complicated.” (71)
A comment from Dr. Matthew Harrison:
“Seeing the ultrasound images and hearing the heartbeat are critical for a woman to make an informed decision about her pregnancy. Studies consistently show that when a woman hears a heartbeat and sees her developing baby, she is much more likely to choose life and find a way to support that child.” (130)
Remarks from Dr. Dermot Kearney, discussing the United Kingdom’s effort to ban APR:
“A valuable lesson learned from this entire experience is that the abortion industry relies upon the pro-life movement to be fearful and silent. The abortion industry is built upon lies and fear. These, however, are very unstable and shaky foundations. When challenged with the expression of truth and with courage, the abortion industry has no rational answer. Above all, they fear the courage of pro-life advocates. They are fearful that the general public will be made aware of the truth about abortion.” (186)
“There are very few interventions in medicine whereby a certain mortality rate of 80 percent can be consistently reduced to a less than 50 percent mortality rate by the application or administration of a simple, inexpensive medical treatment. Abortion pill reversal with progesterone is truly one of the great advances in medicine over the last fifty years.” (189)
After identifying six common themes in the accounts of mothers who underwent APR:
“The last common theme is gratitude. I have not heard of a single mom who has regretted reversing her chemical abortion with progesterone. In fact, the nearly unanimous response is one of pure joy and appreciation. In all my [page 196] years of practicing medicine, including delivering babies and caring for the dying, the greatest gratitude that has been expressed to me has come from the mothers, fathers, and family members of APR babies. There is no regret with APR, only faith, hope, and love.” (195-6)
“The reason Big Abortion attacks APR so aggressively is because they know if the public sees that women regret starting their chemical abortions and seek to reverse them, that calls into question the pro-choice narrative that abortion is a great good for all women. If it were such a great good, why would some regret it?” (209)
Lila Rose’s activity against Google’s censorship:
“In a dramatic and unprecedented move, Google has sided squarely with extremist pro-abortion political ideology, banning the pro-life counterpoint and life-saving information from being promoted on their platform. They aren’t hiding their bias anymore: Google’s censorship baldly reveals that the corporation is in the pocket of the abortion industry.” (220)
“Few people give thought to how aborting a baby in one’s own home might transform how that space is perceived in the future.” (234)
“For men, I have a special message. You are not inconsequential when you have helped conceive a child. You have a role as protector and defender of your partner and your preborn child. Do not shirk your responsibility by defaulting to the current culture’s pat line: ‘I will support whatever choice she makes.’ Women are more likely to choose life when they know their man will stand by them. Fortitude is a virtue, and modern Western men need to rediscover it.” (240)
Readers may buy this book directly from the publisher: https://ignatius.com/abortion-pill-reversal-aprp/.