Resource for emergency contraception

They should.

 

bump

 

bump again

 

Maybe nobody here cares, but "emergency contraception" is a misnomer for a drug that can also prevent implantation after conception (fertilization) has already occurred:

http://www.physiciansforlife.ca/Postfertilization%20Effect%20of%20Hormonal%20Emergency%20Contraception.pdf

 

Exactly, and thereby preventing pregnancy. . .

It also works by thickening the mucous in the fallopian tubes, which helps to prevent the sperm from reaching the egg, and, if an egg has not been released, it helps to prevent one from being released.

 

I have a feeling this comment is a precursor to yet another abortion thread.

Here is my preemptive response:

Is EC a form of abortion or of birth control?

There is general agreement among pro-choice groups, and medical professionals that emergency contraceptives is a contraceptive. It does not not induce abortions. In the even that a pregnancy has begun -- that is, a blastocyst has implanted in the wall of the uterus -- the medication has no effect.

Pro-life groups have a unique definition of the terms "pregnancy" and "abortion" and maintain that these pills can and sometimes do induce an abortion.



It is birth control, according to physicians and pro-choice groups:

Medical professionals and Pro-Choice groups define pregnancy as beginning when a fertilized ovum, which has developed to the blastocyst stage, has attached itself fully to the lining of the uterus. Mary Pendergast of the FDA stated that "The scientific and medical definition of abortion is after implantation [in the wall of the uterus]...These birth control pills are used to prevent pregnancy, not to stop it. This is not abortion." At the time of the FDA announcement, Gloria Feldt, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said that the FDA had taken "a bold step -- a courageous step..." because it brings the information to far more women.

Physicians -- at least those who are not conservative Christians -- generally agree that:

Pregnancy does not begin when an ovum is fertilized; i.e. at conception.
Pregnancy typically begins about 12 days after conception, after the blastocyst has fully implanted itself in the lining of the womb.
Abortions are defined as medical interventions after pregnancy begins.
Since the emergency contraception pills are taken within 3 days of intercourse or an Intra-uterine device (IUD) is inserted within 5 days, they generally prevent the start of pregnancy. Thus, emergency contraception is not a form of abortion.
Physicians conclude that the morning after pill and the IUD are not abortifacients. They do not induce abortions, but rather prevent pregnancy from developing.

It can cause an abortion, according to some pro-life groups:

Most, (if not all) pro-life groups define:

The life of a human being as starting at the instant of conception.
Pregnancy as starting at conception.
As noted above, it is probable that when EC is taken:

Either an ovum has not been released, or
An ovum has recently been released but not fertilized.
Under these conditions, EC acts as a contraceptive. However, it is possible that when emergency contraception is taken, conception has already taken place. Thus they consider the morning after pill as having the potential to terminate a pregnancy and induce an abortion. And since they believe that it terminates the life of a child -- a human person -- they regard both techniques as potentially inducing a murder.

Some pro-life groups appear to ignore the fact that EC usually acts as a contraceptive; they seem to assume that it always acts as an abortifacient:

Gracie Hsu of the Family Research Council said: "For pro-lifers in general, we believe that [human] life begins at conception and that means this, technically, is an abortifacient."
Robert Maginnis, vice president of the Family Research Council said: "As far as we're concerned it causes an abortion to take place. It kills a human embryo." 1
On 1997-FEB-25, the "Christian Medical & Dental Society" (CDMS) of Bristol, TN issued a press release. Using the pro-life definition of pregnancy, they stated that "Contrary to the claims of some, the so-called 'morning-after pill' will dramatically increase - not decrease - the tragic number of abortions in this country. The public is being misled into believing that this concoction prevents a pregnancy when actually in most cases it will abort a pregnancy...Approving and promoting these pills is not only medically irresponsible, it is also sending the wrong message to the American public. Instead of promoting this as an alternative for family planning, we should be emphasizing sexual responsibility."


Who is right?

Religious conservatives and pro-life supporters, alone, classify EC as abortifacient medication. This is consistent with their unique definition that pregnancy begins at conception. Physicians, religious liberals and pro-choice supporters classify EC as a contraceptive, because it prevents pregnancy. This is consistent with the generally accepted definition of when pregnancy begins.

The Fundamentalist Christian organization, Family Research Council (FRC), accuses what they call the "Contraception and abortion industries" of deliberately confounding "the events of female fertility for self-serving reasons. For example, they attempt to redefine the beginning of pregnancy: They claim that pregnancy starts upon implantation of the embryonic human being, rather than when the new life is created at fertilization." 2 The historical record shows that there has been a consensus among physicians for many decades that pregnancy begins at implantation. It is only religious conservatives, and then only recently, who have redefined it as occurring at conception.

Some pro-lifers assert that the "Contraception and abortion industries" define EC as contraceptive medication in order to make it more acceptable to women. The FRC suggests that stem cell researchers are also somehow involved in the promotion of EC. The rationale is that by treating a pre-embryo (a fertilized ovum which has not implanted in the wall of the uterus) as "an entity lacking in rights," that the public might be more willing to allows the use of stem cells extracted from pre-embryos "for scientific research, or as a subject for genetic screening." Some pro-choicers assert that pro-lifers and religious conservatives define EC as abortifacient in order to convince more women to not take EC, and to risk becoming pregnant.



References:

Lawrence Morahan, " 'Morning-After' Pill Available at Some DoD Clinics," CNSNews.com, 2002-JUN-3, at: http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPentagon This URL is no longer accessible.
"Little Pills: Targeting Youth with New Abortion Drugs," Family Research Council. Online at: http://www.frc.org/

 

The question is not whether "EC" prevents pregnancy, but rather, if it always does so by preventing conception, as the term "contraception" implies. "Emergency birth control" would be a more accurate term, don't you think?

 

Preventing birth? No, I don't think "emergency birth control" or "birth control" in general is accurate. Prenancy control is more accurate. Preventing birth is secondary to that.

 

Fine, but "birth control" already a commonly used and understood term. It's a broader term than "contraception" and is more appropriate for describing the "morning-after" pill.

 

All birth control pills, regardless of type, are classified as "oral contraceptives". Calling it the "morning after" pill is very inaccurate.

I agree that "oral contraceptives" is not totally accurate, but it was very accurate based on the information known to us when the term was coined. It is no more or less accurate than birth control, though.

 

Most people I know simply call them birth control pills.

Why?

I would argue that "emergency contraception" is a potentially misleading term, considering that many people have moral objections to preventing the implantation of a newly conceived human embryo.

 

Emergency contraception has unfortunately become popularly known as "the morning after pill." This is a poor term. Many people believe that women have only a small interval of time to take the medication:

Some people have concluded that a woman has to wait for many hours before taking the pill - perhaps until the next morning.
Others believe that the treatment is no longer effective if a woman waits past the next morning.
Neither is true. The medication can be taken immediately after unprotected intercourse, or at any time up to about 72 hours later. Some studies indicate that it is effective even later. However, its efficacy seems to be reduced as time passes, so it is important that, if it is going to be taken, that it be taken quickly.

 

Many people also use the term "homosexual lifestyle" to refer to homosexual orientation. . .

I am afraid I am missing the point.

 

I would agree that women (and men) should make informed, educated decisions. The millions of women on oral contraceptives, though, leads one to believe that most women are in agreement with most medical professionals, that pregnancy has not occured prior to implantation. It is a fertilized egg. When I eat an omlette, I am eating eggs, not chickens. . .

 

Again, that's beside the point; conception has occurred.

"Fertilized egg" is accurate for perhaps the first day, not a week after conception:

http://www.ortl.org/life_in_oregon/01_08/fertilized_eggs.html

 

Thanks Photo for the info.

We should have somthing like designated information threads (just so stuff like this doesn't turn into abortion debates).

 

For it to be an embryo, implantation would have already taken place, meaning pregnacy has occured. At this stage, this type of medication will have no effect. Plan-B, and other "emergency contraceptive" regimens, do not induce abortion, and they have no effect on an embryo.

 

IMPLANTATION defines pregnancy. A womyn who has a fertilized egg in her tubes is not considered "pregnant."

I want this to be an information thread. If someone wants to discuss abortion, please start an other thread.

Thread closed, and I may delete the discussion. This can be discussed in an other thread, if anyone is interested. I "stickeyed" it so people could get the information quickly.