Those interested in reproductive health and rights probably already know that back in December an advisory panel of the Food and Drug Administration recommended that the “morning after” pill1 be sold over the counter (OTC). The easy availability of such emergency contraception (EC) could reduce unwanted pregnancies significantly. Unfortunately, the issue is now running up against political hurdles.
Opponents suggest that easy access to “Plan B” would lead to an increase in sexually transmitted diseases because people would take protection less seriously. However, studies have shown that easier access to contraceptives of this sort does not necessarily lead to change in the level of sexual activity or protections used against STDs.2
For those concerned about abortion issues, please note that EC does not cause abortion, rather, it prevents pregnancy in the first place. So for those who are against abortion, supporting EC should be an obvious choice since by preventing unwanted pregnancies it is likely to reduce the number of abortions as well.
Since the efficacy of this pill is closely tied to its prompt use, requiring women to see a physician in order to get it is a big barrier to its use and utility. Evidence shows all the ways in which this switch to OTC availability would be beneficial. EC is already available without a prescription in thirty countries and in Israel, Norway and Sweden it is sold OTC. A decision about its US availability is expected next week unless the FDA asks for an extension in which case we may have to wait another few months.
1 Calling this pill the “morning after” pill is problematic. One does not need to wait until the morning after to use it, nor is it too late to use it later. The pill can be used safely and effectively in the 72 hours following the act (granted, the earlier the better).
2 Jackson RA, Schwarz EB, Freedman L, Darney P. Advance supply of emergency contraception : effect on use and usual contraception―a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:8-16.
Glasier A, Baird D. The effects of self-administering emergency contraception. N Engl J Med 1998;339:1-4.
Raine T, Harper C, Leon K, Darney P. Emergency contraception: advance provision in a young, high-risk clinic population. Obstet Gynecol 2000;96:1-7.
Results from other related studies are forthcoming.
not to start a fight here, but it’s pretty naive to think any abortion opponents would be swayed by your “EC does not cause an abortion” claim. most pro-lifers with strong views on the subject believe life (and claims to rights) begins at conception. while i’m sure you can create a moral argument for why a fetus would have different rights pre and post implantation, i would say that the medical definition of “pregnancy” isn’t the defining moral moment for most who hold such views.
I had provided a link to a page about this, but I just noticed the link was broken. I don’t know if you saw this on that page: “Medical authorities such as the United States Food and Drug Administration/National Institutes of Health and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists define the beginning of pregnancy as the implantation of a fertilized egg in the lining of a woman’s uterus. [my emphasis] Implantation begins five to seven days after fertilization (and is completed several days later). Emergency contraceptives work before implantation and not after a woman is already pregnant.”
I realize you may be saying that some people may disagree with this as well. It may be, although I would like to know whether they actually understand the physiological differences between the various steps in the process.
I guess one question is whether by “conception” one means fertilization or implantation.
i did acknowledge in my post (though clearly not carefully enough), that i understand the medical definition of pregnancy has everything to do with implantation. but my point was that for pro-lifers (at least the ones i know), it is the fertilization that is important. i was trying to make the distinction between beginning of “life” and of “pregnancy”. i didn’t want to start any arguments about “life” of course, but just wanted to point out that “life” is what matters to the “pro-lifers”. implantation is a more relevant time point from the standpoint of the mother, while fertilization is a more relevant point from the standpoint of the fetus.
again, i think using implantation as the relevant time of “life” could help pro-lifers get around lots of inconsistencies re: in vitro, stem cells, etc., but that’s an argument that has to be fully made, and i don’t think many pro-lifers are yet of that view, which is why they mostly object to EMC, even knowing the physiology of it.
I think most pro-lifers are really opposed to people having sex for any reason other than to make babies within the confines of marriage, so I don’t think they care about any difference between fertilization and implantation. Many pro-lifers are opposed to masturbation because it’s against God’s plan (“Every sperm is sacred”).
Note that US Attorney General John Ashcroft has previous introduced laws asserting legal status begins at fertilization, which would make use of IUDs and the contraceptive pill abortion.
Birth is the defining moral moment when rights are conferred upon an individual. Until that point, the rights of the mother should override any “rights” given to a fetus. This doesn’t mean that the fetus doesn’t deserve special consideration, just that it’s each mother’s right to decide which arbitrary biological or emotional milestone marks the beginning of her child’s life. In my humble opinion.
So-called pro-lifers seek to impose their own arbitrary definition of life’s beginning onto all women, and not coincidentally, this earliest possible beginning of life allows the greatest amount of control over other women’s bodies.
I have no idea what the medical reasons for defining pregnancy as beginning at implantation are, but I’m quite confident that they’re medical reasons and not moral reasons. I can’t think of any justification for holding that an unimplanted but fertilized egg is not a person, but an implanted egg is. The claim that “emergency contraception” cannot cause abortion is very close to intellectually dishonest, in my opinion, because it disguises a serious moral issue behind a medical term of art.
“I can’t think of any justification for holding that an unimplanted but fertilized egg is not a person, but an implanted egg is.”
Actually, there’s a pretty big difference—the unimplanted, fertilized egg is a clump of undifferentiated cells. The zygote can split into a multitude of individual zygotes—Brave New World, anyone?—and each of the zygotes can develop into its own person, each with its own soul. Now, since a zygote can split until it’s implanted in the womb and uterine hormones cause the zygote’s cells to begin to differentiate, and therefore the zygote has the potential for more than one life, I don’t see how a soul, or whatever it is that gives us human dignity, could come into play before implantation. What if a zygote received a soul before implantation, but it suddenly split? We don’t believe that genetically identical twins share a soul; therefore who gets the original soul? Surely it would be easier for the soul to enter the flesh when the individuality of that flesh is assured.
Charles-“Birth is the defining moral moment when rights are conferred upon an individual.”
Using the word “moral” implies that God (or something like it) is in the mix. What teachings do you use to define that point rather than sometime before or after birth?
What is the science issue here? The only issue is a political one: whether the substance should be available over the counter.
I hate to tell you, but the fact is that there are no science issues regarding whether ANY substance should be available over the counter. The only issues regarding that are political ones.
Actually, Plan B (the so-called morning-after pill) works primarily by preventing ovulation, not by preventing implantation. It’s nothing more than a double dose of the ordinary birth-control pill Progestin.
There’s a very tiny risk of preventing implantation by using progestin, but no more so than by using other common medications, such as anti-inflammatory agents (ibuprofen, naprosyn).
A year ago the Nat’l. Institute of Health defined pregnancy as “from conception”. In the past year they have changed the definition under pressure from political activists determined to bypass parental notification requirements for prescription abortificients.
Here’s an even better question.
Why not allow regular birth control pills to be sold over the counter?
This doesn’t seem more political than David Kessler’s work. I realize that academic lefties don’t approve of breast implants or smoking, whereas they do approve of sex, but that is a political judgment, not a scientific one.
“Why not allow regular birth control pills to be sold over the counter?”
Doctors do want to monitor patients on birth control pills to a certain extent. The Pill does sometimes raise blood pressure, and they’re particularly worried about this in smokers. “Do you smoke?” is one of the questions asked when women go in for a prescription (I’ve had friends lie and get away with it).
I think it would be reasonable to sell birth control pills over the counter at places where the pharmacists were trained in taking blood pressure. Only if your blood pressure were above normal/healthy would you be required to see a doctor. They also might not be able to give you the ten months’ prescriptions like doctors can; perhaps only three months at a time so the blood pressure could be monitored more often.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review