Andrea Trudden
California APR Trial: Claims & Truths
The People of the State of California v. Heartbeat International, Inc. and RealOptions
Claims & Truths
California Attorney General Rob Bonta has accused Heartbeat International and RealOptions of misleading women about Abortion Pill Reversal. Yet after six weeks of trial, testimony from 25 witnesses, and nearly 200 exhibits, the State identified no woman harmed by APR and no consumer complaint against APR, Heartbeat International, RealOptions, or a pregnancy help organization related to the challenged communications.
Examine the record
Explore the claims
Category 01
Science & Safety
Claim 01 There is no scientific evidence that Abortion Pill Reversal works.
Scientific evidence does exist. The real dispute is over how that evidence should be evaluated.
Published studies, clinical data, biological research, and comparisons with pregnancies exposed to mifepristone alone support the conclusion that progesterone can increase the likelihood of pregnancy continuation.
The Attorney General’s experts criticized the limitations of the available studies, but scientific limitations are not proof that APR is ineffective. The Attorney General also acknowledged that observational evidence can be used in medicine, and his experts could not definitively testify that APR does not work.
The State also identified no woman harmed by APR and no patient complaint alleging that the treatment failed because Heartbeat’s communications were false or misleading.
The State has conflated “not conclusively proven” with “proven false,” without identifying a woman who was harmed.
Claim 02 Abortion Pill Reversal is unsafe, and the State’s experts established that it is unsafe and ineffective.
The trial did not establish that progesterone causes serious bleeding or other significant complications. Progesterone has been used in pregnancy care for decades.
Most importantly, the State identified no woman who was harmed by Abortion Pill Reversal. It presented no patient complaint against APR, Heartbeat International, RealOptions, or a pregnancy help organization related to the challenged communications.
One of the Attorney General’s principal expert witnesses and a leading critic of APR, Dr. Mitchell Creinin, could not testify under oath that APR is unsafe or ineffective.
When directly questioned at trial, Dr. Creinin acknowledged that he could not say APR does not work or that it is unsafe. His position was ultimately: “We just don’t know.”
The State bears the burden of proving Heartbeat’s statements false or misleading. Its own expert’s inability to conclude that APR is ineffective or unsafe, combined with the absence of an identified harmed woman or consumer complaint, undercuts the Attorney General’s repeated claims.
The State produced no harmed woman, no consumer complaint, and no expert who could testify that APR is unsafe or ineffective.
Claim 03 ACOG has established that Abortion Pill Reversal does not work.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists publicly criticizes APR, but testimony from ACOG representative Dr. Christopher Zahn revealed the limits of that position.
Dr. Zahn acknowledged that ACOG is not aware of any good-quality or even fair-quality evidence establishing that APR does not work. He also testified that ACOG has not formally evaluated APR’s efficacy or safety through its established clinical-guidance process.
Instead, ACOG’s guidance on APR was provided by its government relations team and is not a graded clinical recommendation.
ACOG may criticize the quality of evidence supporting APR, but its public position is not evidence proving APR ineffective.
Claim 04 Heartbeat hides serious medical risks from women.
Heartbeat and RealOptions provide women with safety information and emergency-care instructions, including information drawn directly from the FDA-approved mifepristone warning label.
Women are informed that bleeding, cramping, and miscarriage symptoms may occur after taking mifepristone. RealOptions’ materials specifically instruct women experiencing heavy bleeding, faintness, severe abdominal pain, or fever to seek immediate medical attention.
The State argues that these warnings should be presented differently and should attribute bleeding more directly to the APR process. But no evidence established that progesterone itself causes hemorrhage.
The State also identified no woman harmed by APR and no patient complaint alleging that Heartbeat or RealOptions concealed a medical risk.
Heartbeat provides information to help women make informed decisions.
Category 02
Marketing & Communications
Claim 05 Heartbeat falsely advertises a 64–68% APR success rate.
The 64–68% range comes directly from a published, peer-reviewed study of specific progesterone protocols. It was not invented by Heartbeat.
The study reported pregnancy-continuation rates of 64% for one protocol and 68% for another. Heartbeat recommends the high-dose oral protocol associated with the higher reported rate and identifies the figures as results from initial studies.
California focuses instead on the study’s combined rate across all protocols, but the medical and public health fields generally prioritize communicating the most effective option clearly rather than presenting a full menu of success rates for every alternative.
Heartbeat’s success-rate statements came from published, peer-reviewed research.
Claim 06 The term “Abortion Pill Reversal” is inherently misleading.
“Abortion Pill Reversal” describes what women are seeking: an opportunity to counteract the effects of mifepristone and attempt to continue their pregnancies.
Women frequently use words such as “reverse” when searching online for urgent help after taking the first abortion drug. This language enables them to find time-sensitive information and connect with medical professionals. “Reverse” accurately describes the mechanics of competitive antagonism.
Prohibiting the term would not merely regulate a label. It could make assistance harder to find during the narrow window when a woman is searching for another choice.
No woman came forward to complain that the term deceived her or caused her harm.
Using the words women actually search helps them find time-sensitive care.
Claim 07 Heartbeat offers false hope to emotionally vulnerable women.
Heartbeat offers women information, compassionate support, and access to medical professionals. We do not promise that APR will work for every woman, and no medical intervention can guarantee a particular outcome.
Women who contact the Abortion Pill Rescue Network are not passively responding to advertising. They are actively and urgently searching for help because they have changed their minds and want to know whether continuing their pregnancies may still be possible.
Their vulnerability is not a reason to withhold information. It is a reason to respond quickly, honestly, and compassionately.
California portrays these women primarily as vulnerable consumers. We recognize them as women exercising their right to seek help continuing their pregnancies. We offer that help to them for free.
The State identified no woman who complained that APRN offered her false hope and no woman who was harmed by receiving this information.
Regret is a powerful motivator. Hope is not deception, and no woman should be denied information because she is frightened or has changed her mind.
Claim 08 Heartbeat’s APR communications are commercial advertising.
A recent federal ruling protecting Mayday Health’s abortion-pill advertising undermines that claim.
Mayday is a nonprofit that provides free information and links women to third-party abortion-pill vendors. Although it solicits donations and sells merchandise, a federal court concluded that its advertisements were not commercial speech and temporarily blocked South Dakota from restricting them. Read the July 17, 2026 order.
Heartbeat likewise does not sell medication, charge women for information, or receive referral fees. Yet California argues that our communications become commercial because we fundraise and connect women with APR providers.
The ruling was preliminary and involved a different law, but its reasoning exposes a troubling double standard: Free information about obtaining illegal abortion pills is treated as protected speech, while free information about continuing a pregnancy with a legal medication is treated as commercial advertising.
Free information about continuing a pregnancy deserves the same constitutional protection as free information about ending one.
Category 03
AG Bias Against Life-Affirming Pregnancy Help
Claim 09 This case is not about free speech or viewpoint discrimination.
California is asking the court to penalize Heartbeat for its speech and restrict what we may say about APR. That necessarily raises serious First Amendment concerns.
The State has aggressively investigated and prosecuted pro-life organizations while failing to apply comparable scrutiny to abortion providers and APR opponents.
The trial record included evidence that women contacted APRN after abortion providers told them there was no hope, withheld information about APR, or made categorical claims that were not supported by the evidence.
The government may investigate actual deception. It may not select one side of an unsettled medical and moral debate and declare that only the favored side may speak, particularly when it has identified no harmed woman or consumer complaint.
The State seeks to restrict one viewpoint despite identifying no harmed woman and no consumer complaint prompting its intervention.
Claim 10 The lawsuit arose from a routine, neutral review of Heartbeat’s APR communications.
The following documented actions preceded Attorney General Bonta’s lawsuit:
- Following the Dobbs decision, Bonta created the California Reproductive Rights Task Force in October 2022 to protect and expand abortion access.
- Meeting minutes show task force participants discussing possible false-advertising lawsuits against pregnancy centers and specifically raising Abortion Pill Reversal as a potential target.
- Another participant noted there was no evidence at that time that pregnancy centers were violating California’s False Advertising Law.
- Bonta’s office issued investigative subpoenas and interrogatories to Heartbeat International and RealOptions concerning their HIPAA and privacy practices. That investigation did not identify wrongdoing related to those practices.
- Nine months after the task force discussion, Bonta filed the lawsuit against Heartbeat and RealOptions over their APR communications.
- Throughout his tenure, Bonta has publicly advocated for abortion access, defended California’s abortion laws, opposed abortion restrictions in other states, and promoted California as a safe haven for abortion providers and those seeking abortions.
The lawsuit was not prompted by a complaint from a woman who received APR information or treatment. The State ultimately identified no woman harmed by APR or by the challenged communications.
These actions and the documented timeline form part of the record surrounding the Attorney General’s decision to bring this case and call into question whether the action was viewpoint discriminatory.
This lawsuit did not begin with a harmed woman or consumer complaint; it followed a government effort to find a case against pro-life pregnancy help.
Claim 11 Attorney General Bonta created the Reproductive Rights Task Force simply to protect access to reproductive healthcare.
Attorney General Bonta publicly launched the California Reproductive Rights Task Force on October 25, 2022, four months after Dobbs, describing its mission as protecting and expanding abortion access across California.
But evidence presented in this case showed the task force was also used to brainstorm legal action against pro-life pregnancy centers.
Meeting records included proposals to pursue pregnancy centers for false advertising and specifically target Abortion Pill Reversal, even though one participant acknowledged there was no evidence that pregnancy centers were violating California’s False Advertising Law.
No complaint from a woman harmed by APR was identified. Nevertheless, the task force became part of the process used to search for a case against organizations whose viewpoint and mission are centered on offering women alternatives to abortion.
The task force discussed targeting pregnancy centers even though no consumer complaint or evidence of false advertising had been identified.
Category 04
Women’s Choice & What Is at Stake
Claim 12 This lawsuit protects reproductive freedom.
Reproductive freedom must include a woman’s right to continue her pregnancy.
California law recognizes the right to choose to bear a child and protects those who assist women in exercising pregnancy-related decisions. Yet the Attorney General seeks to restrict the very network that helps women who regret beginning a chemical abortion and want to continue their pregnancies.
The State identified no woman harmed by receiving APR information and no woman who complained that the network prevented her from exercising a free choice.
Reproductive freedom must include a woman’s freedom to change her mind and seek help continuing her pregnancy.
Claim 13 The requested penalties are reasonable consumer-protection measures.
The Attorney General is seeking maximum cumulative penalties by counting a woman’s website visit, hotline conversation, and consent form as separate violations under two different statutes.
The State’s post-trial calculations allege at least 5,131 violations of each statute by Heartbeat. At the maximum statutory rate, this theory could expose Heartbeat to more than $25 million in penalties, even though:
- Heartbeat provided its services completely for free.
- The State identified no woman harmed by APR.
- The State presented no consumer complaint against APR, Heartbeat International, RealOptions, or a pregnancy help organization related to the challenged communications.
- The State did not establish that progesterone caused physical harm.
- The State did not identify financial losses suffered by women.
- The challenged statements were grounded in published research and clinical evidence.
- Heartbeat disclosed that treatment could not guarantee pregnancy continuation.
Such a penalty would not simply “correct” particular language. It could cripple Heartbeat International and jeopardize the 24/7 network women rely upon for immediate help.
California seeks more than $25 million in penalties without identifying a harmed woman, a financial loss, or a consumer complaint.
Claim 14 If California wins, this ruling would only affect Heartbeat and Abortion Pill Reversal.
The immediate intended impact of the ruling would be for the organizations and communications at issue in this case. But the legal questions raised by the case could have implications well beyond Heartbeat or Abortion Pill Reversal and potentially even far beyond California.
California is asking the court to treat Heartbeat’s free, nonprofit communications about APR as advertising that can be punished under laws designed to prevent false or misleading business practices. Heartbeat does not sell progesterone used for APR, nor do we charge women for the information, or receive referral fees from the medical professionals who provide care. The State nevertheless argues that these communications fall within its consumer-protection laws because Heartbeat engages in fundraising to support these services it offers women for free.
If the court accepts that approach, it could provide a legal framework that other state governments may seek to use against nonprofit organizations whose mission-driven communications they disagree with, labeling them false or misleading and leveraging consumer protection statutes to silence the disfavored speech. Future cases would still depend on their own facts, laws, and constitutional questions, but that is why the implications of this case could extend beyond the abortion context.
For Heartbeat, the question is bigger than APR: How much power should the government have to restrict the speech of a nonprofit organization when it disagrees with what that organization is telling the public?
The bottom line
This case is about far more than a disagreement over medical wording.
The State seeks to treat scientific debate as proof of deception, classify charitable ministry as commercial activity, impose financially devastating penalties, and restrict one side of an ongoing medical and moral debate. Yet after years of investigation and six weeks of trial, it identified no woman harmed by APR, no financial loss, and no consumer complaint against the organizations it seeks to punish.
Heartbeat International stands by the women who have sought another choice, the medical professionals who have served them, and the truthfulness of our mission-driven communications.
No woman was identified as having been harmed. No consumer complaint prompted this case. Yet California seeks to silence the very organizations women contacted when they wanted help continuing their pregnancies.
Women deserve accurate information. They deserve compassionate support. And when they regret beginning an abortion, they deserve the opportunity to seek help continuing their pregnancies.
The court has not yet issued its decision. Heartbeat International remains confident in its case and grateful for the prayers and support of our ministry partners and friends.
Meet Lanie
"Because someone answered, I get to be her mom."
"When I found out I was pregnant, I was overwhelmed and afraid. My fiance and I had three children, and were struggling financially. For the first time in my life, I considered abortion. I told myself it was the responsible choice because I feared providing for our children, and I scheduled an appointment.
I left that appointment with the medication and every intention of going through with it. For more than a week, I held onto it. As the days passed, I felt like I was running out of time... so I took the first abortion pill.
Then everything changed.
The reality of what I was doing hit me all at once, and I experienced immediate regret. I was terrified, heartbroken, and desperately searching for answers—any hope at all that I could save my baby. I found myself on my bathroom floor in the middle of the night, calling every hotline I could find.
I wasn't looking for someone to make a decision for me. I was looking for someone to tell me if I still had a choice.
When I contacted the Abortion Pill Rescue Network, Evie answered. Even in the middle of the night, I was treated with kindness, compassion, and respect. She listened to my fears, explained my options, and connected me with medical care immediately. I wasn’t pressured or judged. She simply helped me through one of the most difficult moments of my life.
Today, because of that help available, I have my sweet daughter Josie.
She is joyful, stubborn, funny, loving, and deeply cherished. She is my little shadow, my mini-me, and one of the greatest blessings of my life.
When I look at Josie, I don't see a difficult season in my life. I see a beautiful little girl who is deeply loved and whose life has touched our family in ways I never could have imagined.
She is not just part of our story. She is one of the best parts of it."
California AG downplays women's stories: More than 200 Abortion Pill Rescue patients speak out
Open letter highlights the voices of women who sought abortion pill reversal and now oppose efforts to restrict information about the protocol.
June 24, 2026
Contact This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
COLUMBUS, Ohio – More than 200 women who personally sought help through the Abortion Pill Rescue® Network (APRN) have signed an open letter expressing their gratitude for the care, information, and hope they received after choosing to try and reverse an abortion they did not want to finish. More than 40 of those women are Californians, from the very state where Attorney General Rob Bonta is seeking to silence Heartbeat International, the organization that manages APRN, and punish its speech about abortion pill reversal in the case The People of the State of California v. Heartbeat International & RealOptions.
“These precious women and their babies are not political talking points,” Danielle White, General Counsel for Heartbeat, said. “They are the women whose voices and hopeful, life-altering stories have been largely absent from the public conversation. It’s appalling that California’s lawyers seek to paint hope as harm, to silence their stories and dismiss as mere delusion their tangible gift of motherhood after APR. It is also revealing that California cannot produce a single woman who claims to have been harmed by information about the APR protocol, even as multiple happy mothers prepare to take the stand to testify to how APR helped them to reverse their in-progress abortions.”
Signers voluntarily contacted the APRN after taking mifepristone because they wanted to know if there was any possibility of continuing their pregnancies. They indicate in the letter that they were “free to accept or decline that care.” They reached out to the APRN because they wanted information during one of the most time-sensitive and emotional moments of their lives. And APRN provided them free, compassionate help.
The open letter reads, in part: “Hope is not harm. Information is not misconduct. Compassion is not deception.” The letter notes that “women deserve to know all of their options” and signers support “the continued availability of Abortion Pill Rescue Network services for women who may one day find themselves in the same position.” The letter also indicates that many of the women who signed the letter welcomed children they cherish today, while others may not have experienced the outcome they hoped for.
“Heartbeat is honored to stand alongside these courageous women as they share their experiences publicly,” Andrea Trudden, vice president of communications and marketing, said. “Each signature, story, and baby picture we receive reminds us that patients deserve truthful information, compassionate care, and the freedom to make informed medical decisions without government censorship.”
The complete open letter, signed by more than 200 women, is available on the APRN website.
###
Heartbeat International is the largest worldwide network of life-affirming pregnancy help organizations, offering support, training, and resources to empower women and families to choose life. The Abortion Pill Rescue Network is one of Heartbeat’s key initiatives, providing a 24/7 helpline and access to a network of medical professionals to help women seeking to reverse chemical abortions.
Website | HeartbeatInternational.org
Facebook | /HeartbeatInternational
Twitter | @HeartbeatIntl
Heartbeat Speaks Up for Pregnancy Help on Capitol Hill
Heartbeat partners with AUL to equip pregnancy help leaders for advocacy
Heartbeat International partnered with Americans United for Life (AUL) and other pro-life organizations for the inaugural "Telling Our Story: The Keys to Unlocking Pregnancy Center Advocacy" training, held June 3-4 in Washington, D.C. While Heartbeat's annual Babies Go to Congress initiative brings a small number of pregnancy help organizations, mothers, and babies to Washington to share firsthand stories with policymakers, this event equipped nearly 90 pregnancy help leaders from across the country gathered for practical training on communicating their mission, engaging elected officials, and advocating effectively at the local, state, and federal levels.
Heartbeat's Director of Government Relations, Jessica Prol Smith, joined AUL leaders to provide instruction on the legislative process, while Vice President of Communications & Marketing Andrea Trudden moderated a panel on effectively telling the story of pregnancy help. Heartbeat President Jor-El Godsey also participated throughout the event and joined pregnancy help leaders in meetings with Members of Congress and Congressional staff on Capitol Hill. Pregnancy Help News Editor Lisa Bourne documented the event.
The training comes at a time when pregnancy help organizations continue to face misinformation, political attacks, and legislative challenges. Through partnerships like this, Heartbeat remains committed to equipping affiliates with the tools and confidence needed to advocate for life-affirming care and ensure policymakers understand the vital role pregnancy help organizations play in serving women and families.
Heartbeat briefs Hill staff: Moms.gov leads thousands to hope and help
On June 11, 2026, Heartbeat briefed Congressional staff on the immediate impact of Moms.gov, a website designed to provide information, support, and practical help for new and expectant mothers, with its very first link pointing to Option Line.
Option Line saw a significant and immediate increase in traffic across the platform, with a clear spike beginning the day Moms.gov launched. The government website referral has already resulted in more than 26,000 visits to the Option Line center locator, a total site view increase of 319%, meaning more connections to pregnancy help. Our Director of Government Relations, Jessica Prol Smith, then invited Hill staff to use the website's ZIP code search function to find pregnancy centers in their local district.
Heartbeat submits testimony to U.S. House Judiciary Committee
On June 9, 2026, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee held a hearing assessing the role that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has played in distorting civil rights policy and manufacturing division. Witnesses and Members argued that the SPLC may once have been a more honest advocate for the vulnerable but has clearly lost its way.
Heartbeat submitted public written testimony expressing how the SPLC's defamatory and biased treatment of the pregnancy help community creates the implicit justification for violent attacks, smear campaigns, corporate discrimination, and legal harassment. Others addressed how the SPLC has weaponized its advocacy to deplatform conservative and Christian organizations, failed to address the pro-abortion terrorism led by Jane's Revenge, and irresponsibly sidelined pro-life advocates. Heartbeat's testimony noted that affiliates will continue to offer resources and support — even in the face of political hostility — but also argued that the country will be a better place if the organizations fomenting such hostility are held accountable.
California Seeks $20 Million to Silence Pro-Life Nonprofit Over Abortion Pill Reversal
The first trial of its kind puts women's right to information and a nonprofit's First Amendment protections on the line
June 22, 2026
Contact: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
COLUMBUS, Ohio – On June 24, Heartbeat International will stand trial in California Superior Court in what is to be the first lawsuit over Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) to reach trial in the United States.
In People v. Heartbeat International, et al., the California Attorney General is seeking nearly $20 million in penalties against Heartbeat International over its promotion of APR through its Abortion Pill Rescue Network (APRN). This case will decide if state attorneys general have the right to issue ruinous fines against a charity whose viewpoints those AGs disfavor. Heartbeat has asked the court to find that the First Amendment protects their speech and women’s rights to access information about all available options following a chemical abortion.
“California claims to fight for women's choices. But seeking the 'death penalty' in fines to silence the charity she calls when she changes her mind is not freedom — it's control,” said Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International. “No mom should be denied the chance to save her own baby's life. Heartbeat will always fight for a mother’s right to know and her right to choose life.”
California conceded that it has received no complaints from California women regarding APR. Instead, the trial will include testimony from mothers who sought help through Heartbeat's network and are today raising healthy children after choosing to reverse their abortion — firsthand accounts of the access to information this case puts at risk.
"This is the first case of its kind to reach trial, and the implications extend far beyond Heartbeat International,” said Danielle White, Esq., general counsel for Heartbeat International. “A ruling in California's favor would hand attorneys general across the country a roadmap to penalize any non-profit organization that provides women with information the state disagrees with."
APR has been offered to women since 2012, using progesterone — an FDA-approved hormone safely prescribed during pregnancy since the 1950s — to counter the effects of mifepristone if administered within 72 hours. Statistics show more than 8,000 lives have been saved following the protocol.
Heartbeat International maintains that the state's case represents an unprecedented use of consumer protection law to restrict the free flow of medical information, with consequences that would reach well beyond California.
Heartbeat International remains committed to ensuring no mother faces that decision alone. Through its Abortion Pill Rescue Network, Heartbeat operates a 24/7 helpline connecting women with a nationwide network of medical professionals trained to provide APR treatment because no woman should be forced to complete an abortion she no longer wants.
###
Heartbeat International is the largest worldwide network of life-affirming pregnancy help organizations, offering support, training, and resources to empower women and families to choose life. The Abortion Pill Rescue Network is one of Heartbeat’s key initiatives, providing a 24/7 helpline and access to a network of medical professionals to help women seeking to reverse chemical abortions.
Website | HeartbeatInternational.org
Facebook | /HeartbeatInternational
X | @HeartbeatIntl
Heartbeat International Launches National Tracker Documenting Reported Abortion Pill Poisonings and Forced Abortions
New public resource seeks to track growing reports of coercion, deception, and abortion drug misuse across the United States
May 29, 2026
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Heartbeat International launched a new national tracker documenting reported abortion pill poisonings and forced abortions across the United States. The tracker, hosted by Pregnancy Help News, provides a centralized resource for journalists, policymakers, pregnancy help organizations, and members of the public seeking to better understand the growing number of reported incidents involving abortion drugs being used without a woman's knowledge or consent.
The tracker compiles publicly reported cases from across the country and organizes them by state. Heartbeat International plans to update the resource as additional incidents become known.
The project was developed in response to an increasing number of calls received through Heartbeat International's Abortion Pill Rescue® Network (APRN), which provides care to women who regret beginning a chemical abortion and seek information about continuing their pregnancies. In recent years, APRN staff have also observed a troubling increase in calls involving reproductive coercion, pressure to abort, and allegations that abortion drugs were administered without a woman's knowledge.
"We are hearing from more women who feel pressured into abortions they do not want, many coerced or forced abortions, and we are increasingly hearing from women who believe they are being poisoned with abortion drugs," said Christa Brown, Senior Director of Medical Impact for Heartbeat International who oversees the Abortion Pill Rescue Network. "Many of these women are frightened, confused, and unsure where to turn. They often are afraid that no one will believe them."
According to Brown, the concerns extend beyond individual cases and point to a broader pattern emerging alongside the widespread availability of abortion drugs through mail-order distribution and online providers.
"Every woman deserves to make decisions about her pregnancy free from coercion, threats, manipulation, violence, or deception," Brown said. "When abortion drugs become increasingly accessible outside traditional medical settings, opportunities for misuse also increase. The stories we hear every week remind us that these drugs can be used not only for abortion but, in some cases, as tools of control and abuse."
While Heartbeat International has maintained internal records of reported incidents for years, organizational leaders determined that a public-facing resource was needed to help identify trends and provide greater visibility into a growing concern.
"Publicly reported cases likely represent only a fraction of what is actually occurring," said Andrea Trudden, Vice President of Communications and Marketing for Heartbeat International. "Many women never report what happened to them, particularly when the person responsible is someone they know and trust. By creating this tracker, we hope to provide a factual resource that helps illuminate patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed."
Heartbeat International hopes the tracker will serve as a reference point for media coverage, policy discussions, research, and public awareness efforts related to abortion pill distribution and safety.
The tracker is available now through Heartbeat's news website, Pregnancy Help News, and will continue to be updated as new reports emerge.
About Heartbeat International
Heartbeat International is the world's largest network of life-affirming pregnancy help organizations, supporting more than 4,000 affiliated locations in more than 100 countries. Through programs including Option Line® and the Abortion Pill Rescue Network®, Heartbeat International connects women facing unexpected pregnancies with compassionate support, medical referrals, and life-affirming care.
Moms.gov roundtable discussion featuring Option Line
On Mother's Day, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) launched a brand-new website for mothers and women preparing for motherhood: Moms.gov.
This national resource is designed to provide information, support, and practical help for new and expectant mothers as they prepare for this important season of life. What made this especially meaningful for us was discovering that the very first link featured on the site directs women to Option Line.
Here are some clips from the Moms.gov roundtable discussion featuring many key players at HHS and the pro-life movement, in addition to Jor-El Godsey, Tonya Baker-Nelson from Hand of Hope Pregnancy Center, and client Samantha Spivey:
View the full event recording below
HHS’ New Moms.gov Features Heartbeat’s ‘Option Line’ as Go-to Resource for Mothers and Families
May 11, 2026
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Heartbeat International welcomes the launch of Moms.gov by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), a new national resource designed to provide information, support, and practical help for new and expectant mothers.
Among the most notable features of the new site is that the very first resource link directs women to Option Line, Heartbeat International’s 24/7 contact center connecting women to life-affirming pregnancy help and local support services.
The inclusion of Option Line on the site reflects more than two decades of trusted service through Option Line, which has been helping women since taking its first call in 2003. Since then, the contact center has served as a compassionate, immediate connection point for women seeking pregnancy support, offering accurate information, pregnancy resources, and referrals to local care through a nationwide network of pregnancy help organizations.
“Motherhood is how we all got here. Every woman should be loved and supported in her pregnancy,” said Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International. “That’s why we’re grateful for the trust to serve to connect moms to the kind of choices everyone can live with.”
Andrea Trudden, vice president of communications and marketing for Heartbeat International, said the inclusion of Option Line reflects years of consistent service rather than political advocacy.
“Option Line is a natural fit for Moms.gov because it represents more than two decades of trusted, compassionate service to women and families,” said Andrea Trudden. “Since taking its first call in 2003, Option Line has provided 24/7 support, connecting women to real help, accurate information, practical resources, and local care. When HHS looked for a trusted national resource for mothers, Option Line was already doing that work every day.”
In addition to connecting women to Option Line, Moms.gov also links families to federally qualified health centers and other supportive resources, signaling a broader commitment to strengthening families and ensuring women have access to care and community support.
Heartbeat International sees this as a meaningful step toward elevating life-affirming resources and recognizing the vital role pregnancy help organizations play in serving women, children, and families across the nation.
About Heartbeat International
Heartbeat International is the largest network of pregnancy help organizations in the world, supporting nearly 4,000 affiliates in more than 100 countries. Heartbeat International advances life-affirming pregnancy help through training, support, advocacy, and services including Option Line and the Abortion Pill Rescue Network.
Heartbeat International Applauds Supreme Court’s Unanimous 9-0 Decision Protecting Pregnancy Help Organizations’ Constitutional Rights
April 29, 2026
"This ruling makes clear that no attorney general, no matter how politically motivated, can weaponize the power of the state to punish those who protect life and serve women with compassion."
- Jor-El Godsey
COLUMBUS, OH - Heartbeat International welcomes today’s unanimous 9-0 ruling by the United States Supreme Court in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport, affirming that faith-based pregnancy help organizations do not have to surrender their constitutional rights before seeking protection in federal court.
The Court ruled that First Choice could challenge the New Jersey Attorney General’s sweeping subpoena in federal court before being forced to comply. The subpoena demanded sensitive donor and personnel records despite no allegations of fraud or financial misconduct, targeting the organization because of its Christian, pro-life convictions. Heartbeat submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in support of First Choice, arguing that pregnancy resource centers would speak less freely if government surveillance loomed.
“Today’s 9-0 decision is a powerful and unanimous affirmation that constitutional freedoms do not disappear simply because someone holds pro-life or Christian convictions. Every single Justice of the United States Supreme Court stood on the side of First Choice Women’s Resource Centers and against government overreach that sought to intimidate and silence faith-based pregnancy help organizations. This ruling makes clear that no attorney general, no matter how politically motivated, can weaponize the power of the state to punish those who protect life and serve women with compassion. We celebrate this victory not only for First Choice, but for every pregnancy help organization, donor, and ministry across the nation that deserves the freedom to live out its mission without fear.” — Jor-El Godsey
“The Supreme Court’s unanimous 9-0 decision sends a clear legal message: the government cannot evade constitutional scrutiny by hiding behind investigatory subpoenas. The Court today rightly recognized that the harm begins the moment the government uses its power to chill speech, intimidate donors, and target ministries based on their beliefs. Faith-based pregnancy help organizations should not have to endure government overreach before they can defend their constitutional rights in federal court. This decision is a vital safeguard against abuse of power and a strong reminder that constitutional protections must be available when they are needed most.” — Danielle White
About Heartbeat International
Founded in 1971, Heartbeat International is the largest network of life-affirming pregnancy help organizations in the world, with nearly 4,000 affiliated locations spanning more than 100 countries. Through training, resources, and support, Heartbeat International empowers pregnancy help organizations to reach and rescue more women, and to renew communities for life.
