The Life Challenges Podcast
Modern-day issues from a Biblical perspective.
The Life Challenges Podcast
What’s Trending? Abortion Pills, IVF, and Home Births
A new generic abortion pill hits the market, IVF access expands, and home births surge—each framed as progress, each carrying hidden costs. We pull apart the headlines and ask the harder question: what protects vulnerable lives when policy moves faster than moral clarity?
First, we unpack the FDA’s approval of another mifepristone generic and why “identical formulation” doesn’t settle the ethical debate. Safety talk often skims maternal side effects while ignoring the unborn child’s near‑certain risk. We share what informed consent should include, where reversal protocols fit, and how education—not outrage—changes hearts.
Then we turn to IVF. Lower prices and broader coverage sound compassionate, yet the standard process frequently creates more embryos than will ever be transferred, leaving many discarded or frozen. We affirm the immeasurable worth of children born via IVF and still press a core truth: outcomes don’t excuse methods that treat some lives as expendable. We explore alternatives—limited embryo creation, embryo adoption, clinics with life‑honoring protocols—and practical guidance for couples who want help without hidden casualties.
Finally, we explore the rise of home births: trust in hospitals is shaky, rural options are thinning, and many families desire a more natural experience. We outline risk factors, contingency planning, and how to weigh stewardship over statements. Along the way, we examine a broader cultural shift—how emotion often overrides logic in public life—and why that matters most when the smallest lives can’t speak for themselves.
If this conversation helps you think more clearly and act more compassionately, follow the show, leave a review, and share it with a friend who cares about life, family, and faith. Your voice helps bring careful truth and real hope to more people.
SHOW NOTES:
The FDA's abortion pill approval: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/fda-approves-generic-abortion-pill-mifepristone-rcna235265
The current administration's IVF efforts: https://www.liveaction.org/news/trump-promises-expansion-ivf-cost-saving-measures
Intended Home Births Rising: About 1% of U.S. live births happened at home in 2019 — in 2023, more than 1.5% did, per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The speculation is that the rise is attributed to increasing distrust of traditional medicine. There may also be a correlation with the closure of rural hospitals. (Source: https://tinyurl.com/22ae7j5u accessed 10-6-25)
The ministry of Christian Life Resources promotes the sanctity of life and reaches hearts with the Gospel. We invite you to learn more about the work we're doing: https://christianliferesources.com/
On today's episode.
BobFleischmann:People will argue and say, well, because so many lives are lost naturally, just spontaneous miscarriage, that this this is uh this should be okay. But of course, nobody nobody, if they rationally think that through, would follow that logic. The quantity of people who die every day does that mean I could drive recklessly? Because most of the time I drive safely. Oh, once in a while I drive recklessly. Oh, somebody dies, but hey, people die all the time. No, we don't think that way.
JeffSamelson:Welcome to the Life Challenges Podcast from Christian Life Resources. Our world today presents people with complicated issues of life and death, marriage and family, health, and science. It can be a struggle to understand or deal with them. We're here to help by bringing good information and a fresh biblical perspective to these matters and more. Join us now for life challenges.
ChristaPotratz:Hi, and welcome back. I'm Krista Potratz, and I'm here today with Pastors Bob Fleischman and Jeff Samelson. And we welcome you to November. We'll be doing our November Current Events episode today. And the first thing we wanted to touch on was the FDA's abortion pill approval. I believe this was something that was approved, um, they said quietly, maybe before the shutdown, the government shutdown. Uh Jeff, what can you tell us about the uh abortion pill that was approved?
JeffSamelson:Aaron Powell Well, those who kind of defend the decision are are saying our hands were tied because the regulations, the laws basically say that um when somebody comes with a generic version of a drug that has already been approved and the formulation is exactly the same, then you have to approve it. I don't know legally uh how how how strong that that defense actually is. But basically what it is is that uh one of the the two drugs that are used for um medical abortions, chemical abortions, a uh manufacturer, Evita Solutions uh is is the name of the company that's that's putting putting out this generic version of Mifepristone, which is one of the two uh abortion drugs. They were told by the FDA that, hey, your application to produce this has been approved. And of course, people who are pro-abortion think, well, that's just the way it should be. You know, it's a good thing that nobody messed that up. On people who are on the pro-life side generally criticized this either on the sense of, how how could you? This is just awful. You know, you would you had said, Trump administration had said you were going to be against this, you're going to work actually on removing the approval for these abortion drugs. Or it was, well, what did you expect? RFK Jr. is in charge of health and human services, the FDA is part of that. And uh, of course, because he's always been squishy on uh abortion, uh, or has been squishy since he became a Republican, so to speak, this should be no surprise. And obviously, it's it's not a good thing. We don't want chemical abortions, which means we don't want the drugs that that cause it to be legal and to be available. But to a certain extent, there is a water under the bridge aspect to it in the sense that uh it's already been approved, it's already out there. This is just one other uh source that people are going to have for it.
BobFleischmann:The drug was um originally approved back in 2000. And then there's the non-generic version. Right. The original drug. And then in 2019, the uh there's one generic version came out. So this is the second generic version. All three versions, the original and the two generics, like Jeff said, are identically composed. But but so it's an identical thing. I think uh it's plausible the argument that you know if it's been approved already and generics are allowed to come on, uh the government might be a little bit hands-tied because I know that RFK had announced that they were going to now be further investigating the safety of it. Now, uh the research I've done on the safety of it is I know w we tend to to magnify whenever something like this is done and we find a complication, we tend to magnify it to show you how unsafe this could be. I think the pro-life community has its strongest argument by just reminding everybody of how unsafe it is for the unborn child. Minimally 97 out of a hundred times that unborn child is dead. It's totally, really virtually totally unsafe for the unborn child. And um, it might give the pro-life movement an opportunity to further emphasize its drug reversal protocol that's out there, which has caused a lot of controversy as well among the pro-abortion people. But it was sad. You know, we tend to to almost venerate the Trump administration for its well, he Trump takes a lot of credit for appointing the justices that were behind the Dobbs ruling. And we've had a lot of wonderful successes on a legislative level or political level, and this was kind of like out of left field, caught a lot of us off guard. And yet I I'll tell you, I've been reading a lot of stuff on politics, and this is politics. What you get in one hand kind of leaves with the other hand, and for every success there's a failure. And I I think from a a pro-life, Christian pro-life perspective, our strongest defense against this is the education of the heart, proclaiming God's word.
ChristaPotratz:Another thing that also came out to were some new IVF um efforts. Uh I believe it was to make IVF more uh accessible to people. Um can you kind of explain what those are? And and maybe also to just the connection. I know we've talked a little bit about it, but or maybe even like the disconnect in the Conservative Party with IVF, because there is this tendency to think IVF is a really good thing because we want more babies, right? So yeah, can you kind of expand a little bit on that?
JeffSamelson:Aaron Ross Powell Well, um a few weeks ago, this I think second week of um October, uh President Trump announced uh two initiatives that he said were going to uh make in vitro fertilization uh IVF more accessible and more affordable. And uh he promoted these uh as being part of his his greater agenda to expand access to uh uh to fertility benefits and to lower drug prices. And uh he made a comment, I can't remember whether it's particularly in regard to this or just another comment he made uh at a previous uh moment, uh, that you know, he he thinks that this is really pro-life of him because it's uh more kids. You get more kids out of this, and therefore it's uh babies are born, everybody loves babies, you know, we could use more of them in this country, so this this is a really wonderful thing, and he doesn't understand why anybody really would would have a problem with it. And of course, uh anybody who has listened to us uh here on uh uh the Life Challenges podcast uh knows that uh, well, there are many reasons to have problems with uh expanded IVF, because um, as much as it is wonderful that a couple that may have fertility difficulties is able to bring forth a new baby from it, there are multiple other babies that typically uh die or end up in in permanent cold storage because of the whole process and the way it is done. And so uh encouraging IVF is is really something that uh we we would rather not see the government do.
BobFleischmann:Um I mean we almost joke around here about my problem with IVF. But the uh uh this has been an area that has been a very uh very challenging for me with the Trump administration because uh it's it's one of those things where I always say people ideologically kind of are pro-life, but oftentimes it's kind of like thimble level in terms of thinking about it. So Trump's argument would be that this is great, like Jeff said, more babies, that kind of thing. Ignoring the fact of the casualties. Now, when I have talked with people within our own circles who are big fans of IVF, I mean I've been told that we have pastors in our circles that have had IVF, and and I know of people who are members of our churches have had IVF. And a lot of times because we become so ideologically entrenched in the way we are, even criticizing IVF is seen like we're maybe like not fully pro-life because we have this wonderful daughter or granddaughter out of this or grandchild out of this. That's not what we're saying. We we love every life that God grants in this world, but at what cost? And people will argue and say, well, because so many lives are lost naturally, just spontaneous miscarriage, that this this is uh this should be okay. But of course, nobody nobody, if they rationally think that through, would follow that logic. The quantity of people who die every day says, does that mean I could drive recklessly? Because most of the time I drive safely. But once in a while I drive recklessly, oh, somebody dies, but hey, people die all the time. No, we don't think that way. And so it is unfortunate, and I'm not convinced that the administration could be educated on this issue. Well one of the big drivers behind it was Elon Musk. And uh I tend to like a lot of what Musk does. I follow his stuff in the area of biotechnology quite closely. Um in this area, he's just wrong. And so this is a problem. And the Trump administration, since its executive order back in February, um basically moving to make you know IVF more affordable, more accessible, trying to pressure insurance companies to cover it, that kind of stuff. That's an ideological commitment to it without a lot of thought.
ChristaPotratz:Yeah, I think I did see something, and I don't have the numbers in front of me too, but it was showing how many more um embryos are lost in IVF, even just versus abortion, too. And when you see numbers like that, it does hit you like, oh, okay, maybe like Bob would say, I mean, maybe there is a cost with with this too. And but yeah, it it does, I guess, just surprise me how many people do kind of think like Trump and just like, oh, it must be a a good thing.
BobFleischmann:There are things when you when you delve into ethics and particularly bioethics, but really all of ethics, when you d dive deep into it, it doesn't take long before you realize that uh that all of us, myself included, have made a lot of stupid mistakes and ignorance. Never thought it through, never gave it a thought. I was young, I was whatever. And so how do you how do you handle it? For example, I know there are people who listen to this podcast who are offended every time uh we talk about IVF, because they have loved ones who've had children through IVF. My goal isn't to offend anyone only to the extent that the truth of God's word offends. If you are taking a life in a process and you didn't know it, and you now realize it, uh that doesn't somehow negate the value of the child you have, but it is it does pronounce it's a pronouncement upon the actions you had taken. And then then you go back. I just got done reading, you know, where where Paul's writing uh to Timothy and um and he and he talks about, you know, how his actions before his conversion on the road to Damascus were the direct result of his own ignorance and unbelief as a practicing Pharisee. They were acting wrong. And at some point he had to fess up to it. And not only does Paul fess up to it, he later in that same book says, I am the worst of sinners. You know, I look back on it. And you have to you know, I wrote an article for Clearly Carrying uh maybe a couple three years ago, in which I I I entitled it I might be wrong. And I was trying to point out the fact that sometimes you just you you gotta come to the conclusion. If I I always say that we preachers have this problem, and that is you can't say as many words as we do and not not be wrong once in a while, because we're we're all imperfect. So you have to get to that point. And and that's that's always been my my problem with with IVF and the and the Trump administration approach to it, is that you know they've gone so far down this pathway, I don't see a level of introspection in in the administration as a whole that's going to all of a sudden come back and say, oops, we made a mistake. Which again we come back to what I said in the first topic, and that is ultimately it's education and God's word. If you're listening to this and you had a child through IVF and you realize that, you know, they they they told me it was okay, but there were like four embryos that were destroyed, or something like that. There's forgiveness. That's what Christ did. There is forgiveness. But if you're going to ride the horse that says, Well, I don't care. You know, I we got this wonderful child, then you have a different problem. And it's a d it's a it it's beyond an ideological problem, you have a spiritual problem and you have to come to grips with it. And for us looking for the uh the administration to solve all of our moral issues, um we all have a problem then. Because because uh the your heart is finally softened, it's convicted, it's softened, and it's changed by the activity of the Holy Spirit.
ChristaPotratz:Well, uh another uh thing that we wanted to talk about too is the rise of home births. This was something, Bob, I think that you had sent out noticing home births have been increasing uh recently.
BobFleischmann:Well, I I found the article interesting. It was talking about what was going on in the state of Pennsylvania and the rise of home births. It came to mind because a number of years ago I was contacted by some professors from the seminary, and they were concerned that some of the students, the married students, were really wanting to go like all natural. They wanted they wanted uh births from home and so forth. And and it raised it raised some interesting questions. Because first of all, you have to understand that when you are a in a model position like a pastor, that your members look look up to you and they say, well, if the pastor does, it must be okay. And the the problem is, is not you take some added risks when you have a home birth, because what if there's complications? I have a good friend whose wife died in childbirth, and the child was born with severe because the child was stuck in the birth canal and was born with some severe disabilities. And that happened in a hospital setting. Can you imagine what would have happened outside of the hospital setting? And you got those kinds of things. But what was interesting about the article is it raised the question is are a lot of these people concerned about safety in the hospital setting? Like we might be safer at home. Now, I don't know. I spend a lot of time in hospitals, especially the last few years. There's a lot of things I don't like about hospitals, a lot of things that are done in hospitals I don't approve of. There's a lot of kind of organizational things and the way they do things that I'm not happy with. But to be quite honest, I still think something like this, when you have a hospital and you see the level of technology and so forth, in providing the best stewardship I possibly can for life, it just seems like the better choice. It we've got it, we do it. You talk to somebody uh who works where you don't have these resources, um, you know, third world countries and so forth, you know, they give their right arm to have access to a hospital where this could be done and monitors can be put on and so forth. So it's it's it struck me as an interesting, it was a little bit of a deja vu article for me because it made me recall, you know, when that discussion came up uh among some students. People today, because they have the internet, and even more so now because they feel empowered through AI, they almost feel like they're comparable to fully trained medical professionals. I read about this, and of course we read one story of of a hospital situation that went awry, and all of a sudden it carries far more weight than it should in the full spectrum of things.
ChristaPotratz:Yeah. I think, you know, um just no knowing people that have done the home birth route and everything too. I I think there is this rise to just be more natural in general. I mean, whether we're talking about home births or organic food or that type of thing. And so I think maybe some of it also stems from that too. Uh yeah, I mean, it was hard to know exactly what the reasoning is. I know it's uh maybe it was the article or something uh talking in about a little bit like, is it because rural hospitals are closing or or that type of thing, or maybe that was just Bob talking about that too. But but I mean, but I think there is this sense of okay, um we can have it more natural. Um water births were a big thing for a while there too. And so I I don't know if there's necessarily anything wrong with it. But I don't know.
JeffSamelson:And so yeah, there are all sorts of concerns. I I know that the distrust issue, you know, they they they say that this you know is something that's grown since the pandemic. And so there's a suggestion that maybe because people just aren't trusting doctors and scientists as much, that maybe that has to do with it. But the article also very, very clearly says, yeah, there's a problem in that we don't really have data on why people aren't doing this. We just know that the home level of home births has gone up. And so, you know, there's a lot of speculation there, but uh you know, i i is it wrong to do it? It's gonna depend on your motives. Uh that's that's something Bob talks about all the time. You know? But uh be thinking, you know, am I making this choice because I'm trying to prove a point of some sort? Or am I making this choice because it's absolutely what's best for the mother and the baby? And that should be uh your your primary consideration.
ChristaPotratz:Well, uh another thing that we wanted to talk about too was um the the great feminization. This was an article that Jeff had found. And I found it fascinating. I mean, when you sent it um too, and it really I I think part of that was so interesting too. I mean, it talked about women and the workplace and different things too, and that the problem isn't that they're not qualified, the problem is, for at least from this article's view, is that it's changing the way we operate. Um so can you expand a little bit on that?
JeffSamelson:Yeah, this is an article in uh Compact Magazine, which is an online at compactmag.com by a woman named uh Helen Andrews. Uh and and I I I definitely want to mention this is a woman writer, so this is not a man who is writing about this, you know, complaining about oh, those ladies. Uh no, and it's called the Great Feminization. Um and it's basically a very interesting way of looking at things, and it's basically saying that uh the entire woke era that we've been dealing with could possibly be tied not so much to anything that's specific that's like the the content of what's being taught in the universities or changes in regulations uh or the way that rules that individual companies have and things like that, but it's more about women taking over certain spheres of life and and the influence that they have because the way women respond to things, particularly when when they're in the the majority, when they they they have the power, so to speak, is very different from the way that men do. And it's not necessarily saying that all of this is bad, but it is saying this is different and we should be aware of it, because the tendency is that once women kind of take over one of these spheres in society, there's no going back from that. It it was a fascinating article. I'm not saying necessarily, oh yeah, that's right, everything in there is correct, but it is a different way of looking at what we've seen going on in our society, particularly with w what's called cancel culture. And uh it's just just some fascinating stuff that that's worth worth some thought and discussion.
ChristaPotratz:Well, and I thought it I mean it did make me think too. I think at one point the article did just say this is really new for our society to have women in these prominent positions and different things. I mean, I don't think it's ever been like that. I mean, you know, sometimes like you look back in history and be like, oh, this point in time, you know, we were kind of modeling ourselves after this or whatever. It just was saying, yeah, like this is really a a new thing. And so we are experiencing some different things in our society than we haven't before, too. And it just made me think of like the roles of men and women and uh God's design and that type of thing.
BobFleischmann:Well, and it it brings me back to But when when I first got out in the ministry, I very foolishly did Pastor on the Hot Seat, you know, which is just uh we had a we had a group in our congregation called Fellowship, uh, the Fellowship Society. And we did a pastor on the hot seat, and we we had like near 100% turnout to the church from it. It was a mission church when we were growing it, but it was a lot of fun. Sat there and sure enough, somebody had to ask me about men and women in the church, you know, and and voting. And so I gave kind of the pet answer that we had learned. And then the one lady raised her hand and and I knew she could be combative on this thing, and I thought, well, here we go. And and I still hear it's like yesterday. She she says, uh, I know this is going to come as a surprise to everyone, but I agree with Pastor Fleischman, but not for the reasons he thinks. I don't know what to expect. So she said, you know, when we look at the calendar here and it says, you know, the Johnsons and the Smiths and and the Wilsons are going to be cleaning the church, it's Mrs. Johnson and Mrs. Wilson and Mrs. Smith and so forth. And um she said, I've come to the conclusion that if women get the right to vote in the church, the men won't do anything, because that's about all they really do now. You know, and and of course she was she was exaggerating, but uh there is a corollary uh to increase women activity is that men do seem to to kind of like fall back. I one of the problems I've encountered recently is game playing. Kids who get hooked on playing video games and everything. But there are females who get into it, but not nearly to the level that men get into it. And um pornography is an issue. Yeah, women get into pornography, but not nearly to the level men do and so forth. There seems to be something in the male uh makeup that given the opportunity to desert being responsible, we tend to embrace it. Which is interesting because when you read scripture and you read the admonitions about pursuing justice, pursuing righteousness and so forth, there's a lot of hammering on men. In particular, there's I mean, there's sections of the Bible where they're clearly talking about men and women, and and it's it's emphasizing the role of the men. And I know I've read similar, similar stories about feminization that has approached it from the other side too, and that is that it also occurs because of men just taking a declining role, just stepping back and not caring. And those of us who've run congregations, we've experienced this a lot of times when you're thinking about if I need a go-getter, I'm gonna go after Mrs. Johnson, you know, and far more engaged, far more involved, and um plus two educated and helpful. Yeah. It is it is an interesting, it was it it was an interesting article.
JeffSamelson:Just uh you know, to take some of the points that were made in the article just to explain the the premise a little bit more. It says that the way women approach things tends to be different. Uh well it okay, it's referring to an essay that uh was talking about how Larry Summers was ousted as president of Harvard. And says the essay argued that it wasn't just that women had canceled the president of Harvard, it was that they'd canceled him in a very feminine way. They made emotional appeals rather than logical arguments. And that's one of the big points that that she's making there, that so much of what is is being lost with this feminization is a role of logic with things just being pushed into the emotional realm of, well, I don't like that. That makes me uncomfortable, so it must be wrong, we must get rid of it. And it also talks about how men generally are more comfortable with certain types of risk, with certain times types of um uncertainty and things like that, and that the more women take over some sphere, that they tend to be more, okay, we're we're going to keep this safe for us, and we're not going to allow for this thing and that thing that might make us kind of uncomfortable or risk. And he says, that's that's not a good thing. And the author makes particular points, like, this is very important to me because she is somebody who goes against the mainstream. And so she does better in an environment where where the male influence is stronger and there's more comfort with different opinions and and and so forth. And it's just again very very interesting thoughts about it. There are things that she says that had they been said by a man, feminists would be all over it, you know, because I like that's just just chauvinistic claptrap or whatever. Um but again, the fact that it's a woman writing this, I think makes makes it uh that much more powerful.
BobFleischmann:You know, the most common criticism I get, I've gotten over 38 years, 37 years, is that I'm too cold logical. And every time I've gotten that criticism, every time, it was from a woman. And I'm aware of it, and I try to work work on that because you know, I'm I'm the father of five daughters. I've I've got a staff of all women. I mean, I just I'm I've been surrounded by women all the time. But i the criticism always has been that it seems that I'm just too logical to and it's interesting because when I've been in public forums, when somebody starts crying, it uh it mutes the people who want to argue based on the logic of it. It just does. Why? Because none of us want you know, I don't want people crying. But the thing is is that when I want to discuss or debate an ar an argument, I want to debate it on its merits, not on how it makes you feel because quite honestly, you know, give you a drug and make you feel differently. I mean, that's how easily you can change feeling, but you can't change the logic of it.
ChristaPotratz:Well, and I think too, even just like with parenting, too. It's like a kid has a complaint or something. I mean, it it is nice like when both my husband and I can talk about it and that type of thing too, because yeah, I mean, I I am more like, oh, that's so sad, or or something too, where and I I mean even I think we've talked about too, like when the baby would be crying. And I mean, it's just like ripping my soul to hear the baby crying, you know, at night and what it what he should be sleeping.
BobFleischmann:And your husband's going, rub a little dirt in his Yeah.
ChristaPotratz:My husband's like, five more minutes, just give him five more minutes, you know.
JeffSamelson:Uh I I I know a family um where the husband was a pediatrician, the wife was not. The pediatrician knew from his studies, from experience, observation, or whatever, that uh there was great value in letting a crying baby cry it out. You know, not for hours, but you know, you let them cry it out a few nights and they eventually learned to put themselves to sleep. His wife could not abide that. Guess whose policy they ended up following?
ChristaPotratz:Um well, thank you both for this discussion today. And um, we thank all of our listeners too. And if you have questions on any of the topics that we have talked about, you can reach us at lifechallenges.us. Also, too, if there is ever anything in the news that you would like us to talk about, uh please. Send it our way and uh we can we can look into it. We thank you um all for joining us and we'll see you back next time. Bye.
JeffSamelson:Thank you for joining us for the Life Challenges Podcast from Christian Life Resources. Please consider subscribing to this podcast, giving us a review wherever you access it, and sharing it with friends. We're here to help. So if you have questions on today's topic or other life issues, you can submit them as well as comments or suggestions for future episodes at lifechallenges.us or email us at podcast at Christian LifeResources.com. You can find past episodes and other valuable information at lifechallenges.us, so please check it out. For more about our parent organization, please visit Christianliferesources.com. May God give you wisdom, love, strength, and peace in Christ for every life challenge.
