Emerging Criminal Epidemic: Forced Abortion

Thanks to the firm support of the American Rule of Law by President Trump and Congress, crime is trending down across the nation’s cities. While rape (except in Mamdani’s NYC), homicide, and robberies are all falling, one emerging category of heinous crime is on the rise: forced abortion.

These are quiet crimes, happening in the ups and downs of domestic relationships all across America. Often the police don’t get involved until the damage has been done and a baby has been delivered in the toilet. The murder weapon of choice? The abortion pill, Mifepristone.

What happens when the FDA removes safeguards on the dangerous abortion pill? Answer: More people are victimized.

For many years, mifepristone was on the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) list. This provides strict guidelines for drugs that can be especially harmful if abused or misused. One such regulation on mifepristone’s file was in-person dispensing, which was suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic. On Jan. 3, 2023, the FDA made the change permanent under the Biden Administration.

The Biden FDA replaced the in-person dispensing requirement with a system under which pharmacies could be certified to dispense the drug—either in-person or by mail order. Under the current REMS, a patient can obtain mifepristone without seeing a health care provider in person, as acknowledged by the FDA itself: “The Mifepristone REMS Program does not require patients to see a health care provider in person before obtaining mifepristone for medical termination of pregnancy through ten weeks gestation.”

The result is a reign of terror perpetrated on moms and their preborn boys and girls, protected by politicians, and promulgated by abortion pill companies.

Some scummy examples surfacing on the stagnant moral pond of abortion on demand could prove instructive for politicians tasked with representing all citizens.

Hassan-James Abbas, a former surgical resident at the University of Toledo, pleaded no contest in an Ohio court to the charges of unlawful distribution of abortion drugs and identity fraud in May of 2026. Upon discovering that his girlfriend was pregnant, he advised her to abort the baby. When she declined, he purchased two chemical abortion drugs under his ex-wife’s name and allegedly force-fed one to his girlfriend. Abbas was indicted on felony charges in December, 2025 and could face up to five years in prison.

Mason Herring, a former attorney, pleaded guilty to slipping abortion drugs in his then-wife’s drinks upon discovering that she was pregnant. On March 17, 2022, Herring made his first of seven attempts to end his wife’s pregnancy via chemical abortion. Upon drinking a glass of semi-cloudy water, Herring’s wife became violently ill. After several more alleged attempts on her baby’s life, she took him to court, where Herring ultimately pleaded guilty to injury to a child and assault of a pregnant woman. He was sentenced to 180 days in jail and 10 years of probation.

Jon Demeter, in February of this year, allegedly administered abortion drugs to his pregnant girlfriend against her will and without her knowledge. Prosecutors allege that this resulted in the death of the unborn child and serious injury to the woman. Demeter is now facing charges for Performance of an Abortion and Injury to a Child under Texas State Law.

The Abbas case should cause us to ask: how exactly do telemedicine providers verify not only the identity of a pregnant woman before dispensing the drugs, but whether or not she is even pregnant? And how much verification is enough when a drug capable of ending a pregnancy and resulting in life-threatening complications for a woman can be illegally mailed to anyone’s home?

The Herring and Demeter cases raise another disquieting question: How many instances of covert administration of abortion would ever be recognized as such? Given that any abuser can obtain these deadly drugs online, a woman who does not know she was given an abortion drug may simply believe she is suffering a miscarriage.

Why did Biden-era policymakers remove the in-person dispensing safeguard without addressing the possibility of unauthorized access? How could this be the work of a party that is ostensibly “pro-women’s health”?

Be a Lifesaver for a woman and her baby today!
Go to www.compasscarecommunity.com/donate.

And this brings us to a story still unfolding, revealing the moral quagmire created when traditional definitions of personhood get tangled up with altered boundaries in the basic human relationship: marriage.

An Alaskan woman, McKenna West, was carrying the surrogate child of California couple, Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed. Upon discovering that the child had a rare heart condition that would require surgeries after birth, Gilkar and Ahmed allegedly forced West to have an abortion. The couple disputes her characterization of their actions and says their surrogacy agreement contemplated termination in such circumstances. Not wishing to abort the child inside her, West fled to Texas to have the baby. There, a Dallas County Court issued a court order demanding that the hospital offer and continue the life-saving care the child needed.

After West gave birth to the child, whom she named Gabriel, TX Attorney General filed a notice of nonsuit, claiming the immediate need for the emergency action has been accomplished—a successful birth and heart surgery. After the child was placed into the custody of Gilkar and Ahmed, West has vowed to pursue legal action to reclaim custody of the child she traveled to TX to save—the child to whom she gave birth. In response, Gilkar and Ahmed, after their wishes to have the child aborted were denied and the child’s health is now secure, have opened a lawsuit against West, alleging contractual misconduct.

Currently, these crimes and disputes are processed in law, the legislature, and the court of public opinion. The question the judiciary will need to answer is, “To what extent can a mother be protected by law (14^th Amendment) if she is forced to have an abortion?”

The question Congress will have to answer is, “Who gets to deprive a preborn baby of his or her 5^th Amendment right to life without due process?” The telemedicine company illegally shipping the drugs across state lines? The doctor? The abusive boyfriend or husband? The politician? The womb renters? The mother?

Meanwhile, as FDA leadership refuses to place a moratorium on the abortion drug before the Midterms, women and children continue to get hurt.

But when politicians are permitted to disqualify certain classes of human being as “persons” from protection under the law, like preborn babies, it props the door wide open for abuse of other humans, like their mothers, including surrogate mothers.

The importance of Congress bringing a Personhood Clarification Act to vote cannot be overemphasized here, telling the nation’s judges, police, and parents in no uncertain terms that all people, from fertilization to natural death, including a preborn baby, are fully and equally human, deserving of full protection under the law against those who would do harm to these most vulnerable preborn babies and their moms.

The time is now to put an end to forced abortion in the United States of America.

In Christ,

Rev. Jim Harden, M.Div.
CompassCare CEO
EMC Frontline President

P.S. Your $47/month gift provides all the ethical medical care and resources for one woman to have her baby in America’s abortion capital, New York. Become a lifesaver today at www.compasscarecommunity.com/donate!