For Dermot Kearney, for the children he saved from chemical abortion, for their families, and for the British health care system, this is a great victory.
The investigation of Dr. Kearney and Dr. Eileen Reilly by the General Medical Council ended with the full acquittal of the doctor of Irish origin. Now, after about a year of suspension, he will return to practice his method, which has earned him the eternal gratitude of many mothers who regretted their attempt to have an abortion. The treatment, known as Abortion Pill Reversal, is already very popular in the USA and consists of the administration of the natural hormone progesterone which cancels the effects of the abortion pill mifepristone.
The action against Dr. Kearney was initiated by the MSI Reproductive Choices, a think tank fully committed to promoting abortion, contraception and other birth control tools. At the end of the hearings, however, as reported by The Daily Mail, the General Medical Council did not find a single woman who complained about Dr. Kearney’s treatment approach. On the contrary, all patients judged him “kind and thoughtful”, and very gentle in dealing with them at the time of such a dramatic choice.
Interviewed by the same newspaper, Kearney said he was “pleased and relieved” but, at the same time, convinced of the existence of an “orchestrated campaign” against him by the abortion lobby.
The testimonies of the families involved are all very moving. The parents of eight-month-old Khalid say that changing their mind about his life was “the best decision we made.” Ten-month-old Sonny’s mom says, “Without Dr. Kearney, we wouldn’t have him, this wonderful life.” The baby’s daddy adds that Kearney has offered to pay for some private testing out of his own pocket, costing £70. “To find out that there was so much kindness in the world was phenomenal. I found it so generous that I cried,” the man says.
A risk worth taking
A 56-year-old cardiologist, Dr. Kearney is Catholic but says, “I just believe that human life is sacred, regardless of religious context. And I believe this is true from conception.” He himself never deluded his patients that his method would necessarily “work” and took care not to hide the “risks” from them. Of the approximately 150 women referred to Kearney between April 2020 and May 2021, 65 agreed to complete the progesterone cycle. Of the latter, 32 went on to deliver perfectly healthy babies.
The start of this experimental therapy has been all uphill. The first three attempts were all unsuccessful: the baby initially survived, only to die a couple of weeks later.
The accusation leveled by Jonathan Lord, medical director of MSI Reproductive Choices, was that Dr. Kearney would be “imposing his personal beliefs” and that, as president of the British Catholic Medical Association, he was “highly unlikely to be able to offer objective, unbiased advice.” They are accusations that Kearney has dryly rejected, calling them “unfair and false.”
Andrea Williams, CEO of the lobbying group Christian Legal Concern, came out in support of Kearney, describing the cardiologist as “heroic,” and commenting, “We are delighted that justice has been served for this brilliant and compassionate doctor.”
Abortionists unmasked
Exclusively for iFamNews, Kearney went on to recount other details of his case and the rehabilitation of his method.
Dr. Kearney, did you expect such a favorable verdict?
I will preface this by saying that it is important to know that our case ultimately was not heard in court. A High Court hearing in London was scheduled for February 24, but the General Medical Council decided to dismiss my case on February 15, and the conditions imposed on me were formally lifted on February 18, six days before the scheduled court hearing. There is no doubt that the reason for the dismissal of the case against me was related to the threat of the proposed High Court hearing. Therefore, the General Medical Council did not want to appear in court without evidence to support the allegations they made against me. Before we knew the case was dismissed, however, I hoped that, with the strength of the evidence we produced, any court would eventually exonerate me and order the restrictions imposed to be lifted. There was always the concern, however, that justice might not be served and that the evidence produced might not be properly examined.
Why has your work been so uncomfortable for some?
This is very difficult to understand, as the abortion providers and abortion advocacy groups who filed the complaints against me all claim to be “pro-choice.” Yet, they were very adamant in preventing us from helping women who had freely chosen to save their babies, as they changed their minds about proceeding with the abortion after taking the first abortion pill (mifepristone). They challenged the fact that there should be no choice for abortion cancellation treatment. The only possible explanation is that these groups don’t want to believe that some women can actually change their minds, even after taking mifepristone. If they accept that women change their minds, the next uncomfortable question to ask is, “why do they change their minds?” The answer, of course, is that women rarely, practically never, receive adequate counseling before rushing to have an abortion or being forced to have one. The abortion industry certainly does not rejoice at the idea of being exposed for its lack of concern for women.
Given the favorable developments, do you plan to resume treatment?
We hope to re-establish our service in the UK as soon as possible. There are some minor practical issues that will need to be addressed before we formally begin the service again. We hope that it will run even better than before and that more physicians, nurses and pharmacists will be involved. Ironically, the attempt to shut us down and eliminate the abortion cancellation service has led to a remarkable growth in awareness of the service, far more than we could have ever achieved through our own efforts alone.
Discussion about this post