Tag: Contraception

Blog Posts

Birth control is no myth

Jen R

Kristin Powers at the Daily Beast challenges the claim that lessening access to contraception will drive up the abortion rate. I have a few problems with her analysis:

  • Powers cites a study from Spain showing that abortion rates rose alongside increases in contraception use from 1997 to 2007. Marysia already addressed this study, so I'll quickly recap her post: In some cases, an increased desire for smaller family sizes can outstrip the pace at which contraception use increases. In those cases, until contraception use catches up, abortion rates may increase. However, the majority of the evidence shows that in most situations worldwide, increasing the use of effective contraception reduces abortion rates.
  • Powers seems to assume that the 54% of women who had used contraception during the month they became pregnant don't have a problem with access. That's much too simplistic. I can spot a number of potential access problems hidden in those data. For instance, many of the 76% (!) of respondents who say they used the pill inconsistently could be having trouble getting their pills on time every month. Most women can only get one to three months' worth of contraception prescriptions at a time; one study showed that allowing low-income women to get twelve months' worth of pills at a time decreased the odds of unintended pregnancy by 30%, and the odds of an abortion by 46%. Reproductive coercion is another factor that can cause women to use contraception inconsistently. Though this isn't strictly an access issue, family planning clinics have a role to play in helping women recognize and prevent reproductive coercion. Finally, how many of the women in this 54% are using a contraceptive method that's not right for them because they don't have knowledge of or access to a method that might work better, such as implants, IUDs, or sterilization?
  • What about that 46% of women who weren't using any method; there are a lot of educational issues there. Powers cites a Guttmacher Institute fact sheet that says, "About half of unintended pregnancies occur among the 11% of women who are at risk for unintended pregnancy but are not using contraceptives. Most of these women have practiced contraception in the past." Why did they stop using contraception? Did they have trouble finding a method that fit their bodies and lifestyles? Did they need more education to help them evaluate their risk for pregnancy? How is defunding family planning clinics — and remember, Congressional Republicans are trying to defund the entire Title X program, not just that part that goes to Planned Parenthood — going to do anything but make these problems worse?
  • It's true that 46% of women who get abortions weren't using any method of contraception, but most sexually active women of reproductive age do use it, at least to some extent. So a very small percentage of women — 11% — make up a huge percentage of women seeking abortions. Surely it's a worthy goal to keep that small percentage from becoming bigger by not making contraception harder to get.

None of this is an endorsement of Planned Parenthood as an organization. Their ideology is not ours. We believe in a sexual ethic of care and respect for all parties affected by a sexual act, including any children conceived. Still, the important point here is that family planning is vital and access in the U.S. isn't as good as it needs to be.

Blog Posts

Common ground on contraception and preventing abortion: it’s more common than you think

Jen R

David Gushee, a professor of Christian ethics and consistent life ethic proponent, and Cristina Page, a pro-choice activist, have co-authored an excellent post for the Washington Post's "On Faith" blog about preventing unplanned pregnancy and abortion.

To reduce unintended pregnancy and abortion, we know what works. And it is not simply moral outrage. Countries that have the lowest abortion rates in the world, such as Belgium, Germany and Switzerland, are those that have made contraception most easily available; typically free of charge. And so the cuts to family planning being pushed by House Republicans will have dire consequences, not only for their anti-abortion cause, but for many Americans interested in controlling when and how often to have a baby. Indeed, researchers have calculated the effect: cuts to Title X will result in an estimated 973,000 more unintended pregnancies. And those unintended pregnancies will lead to 433,000 unplanned births and 406,000 more abortions each year.

They also point out how out-of-step pro-life politicians are with the majority of grassroots pro-lifers, 80 percent of whom support contraception (a statistic I've cited many times myself, and I'm thrilled to see it get out there in a high-profile forum). If there's a group in this country more poorly represented by its so-called leadership than abortion opponents, I don't know what it is. Most Americans who identify as pro-life don't support attacks on contraception and want our kids to learn more about sex than "don't have it." We know it takes more than simply moral outrage; but moral outrage makes for great political posturing and fundraising letters. So that's what we get.

Blog Posts

Proposed Slash to Global Family Planning Assistance

Marysia

All Our Lives belongs to the Reproductive Health Supplies Coalition, which addresses the shortage of family planning items among the global poor who want them. Already 200 million women worldwide want contraception but cannot access it. Is the US going to doom even more women to unintended pregnancies, abortions, and unsupported parenthood?

US Republicans are seeking to drastically cut US funding of UNFPA, the world’s largest family planning and reproductive health agency.

The proposed cut cannot be about abortion or coerced contraception. By law, US money cannot fund such practices. These two things also violate the mission of UNFPA.

So what is this cut about? All Our Lives has to wonder. Especially because UNFPA has played an important role in developing and distributing CycleBeads, a kind of natural family planning acceptable to people with religious objections to “artificial” methods.

Voluntary family planning is a basic human right. Why, once again, are US politicians trying to take it away-especially politicians who intone “prolife” but undermine everything necessary to prevent abortions?

Blog Posts, Past Actions

Republicans now have no reason to refuse to fund family planning

Jen R

Today the House passed the Pence Amendment, which would prohibit federal family planning funds from going to providers who also perform abortions Planned Parenthood [edited after talking to Mike Pence's office]. The idea is that even though the federal funds can't go directly to abortions, paying abortion providers for other services still helps support those providers.

How many times have you heard conservatives argue against funding family planning by saying that to do so would be "giving money to Planned Parenthood"?  With that reason gone, what reason do conservative legislators have to refuse to fund family planning?

Mike Pence himself says that he doesn't oppose Title X:

"Now, I am aware that Title X family planning funds are eliminated in this bill, but eliminating Title X funding has never been my goal. I support the important work of Title X clinics across the country that provide breast cancer screenings, HIV testing, counseling, and other valuable family planning services. — Floor statement by Mike Pence

If that's true, we should lobby for another Pence Amendment — this time to restore the funding for Title X that H. R. 1 eliminates.

Blog Posts, Past Actions

Stop House Republicans from eliminating Title X family planning funding

Jen R

House Republicans are proposing big budget cuts. Of course, some things are getting cut more than others.* See that line near the bottom of the list?

Family Planning -$327M

That's the entire budget for the Title X family planning assistance program. The Title X program helps about 5 million people per year access family planning services (and thus, in many cases, avoid abortions).

Although many people believe that "family planning" is synonymous with "Planned Parenthood," note that PP received $16.9 million, or 5.7%, of the $297 million Title X budget in 2009. Most of the recipients are public health departments and other entities that do not perform abortions.

If you are a U.S. citizen, please contact your representative via email or call the House switchboard at (202) 224-3121. Ask your representative to vote "No" on the elimination of Title X family planning funding.

* I have Opinions about many of the cuts they're proposing as well as the ones they're not, but I'm trying to stay reasonably on-topic here.

Blog Posts

Beyond Lamenting a Miserable Failure

Marysia

The "prolife" movement as such, at least in the US–and probably elsewhere–miserably fails the sexual and reproductive rights and needs of young women. Instead of helping young women to prepare for and live healthy, happy sex lives and prevent unintended pregnancies and abortions, its sex-negativity and slut-shaming put them directly in harm's way. This story by Andrea Grimes is one bit of evidence. Realistically, what can those of us who believe in nonviolent sexual and reproductive choice do to serve young women's needs and undo the considerable harm done in the name of "respecting life"? Personally, I have been speaking out on this subject for over 25 years now. And I feel like I'm just beating my head on a brick wall.

Blog Posts

Contraception Reduces Abortion: The Evidence

Marysia

Some who conflate contraception with abortion and oppose both are gloating over a study from Spain. It reports that as contraceptive use increased, the abortion rate went up.

The researchers concluded only that the reasons for the increase in abortion await further investigation, which is the responsible thing for scientists to say when they do not know yet.

However, the conflaters quickly decided that it must be because people were having more feckless, casual, irresponsible sex; because they can't be trusted to learn how to use family planning methods effectively; and of course because so many of those contraceptives are really abortifacients.

Other hypotheses are far more plausible.

The bulk of the available evidence shows that in almost all situations worldwide, contraception reduces abortion rates.

One observed exception: if contraceptive services are increased, but they do not keep pace with people's desire & need for smaller family sizes, the abortion rate may go up, temporarily, and then finally decline when programming catches up. Scaling up family planning programs in anticipation of such an increase can help prevent it. In other words, more contraception does result in fewer abortions.

The bulk of the scientific evidence also shows that IUDs and hormonal contraceptives truly prevent conceptions rather than implantations. Please read this report from Family Health International, as well as this testimony from the World Health Organization from the debate in the Philippines over reproductive health legislation. The International Consortium for Emergency Contraception publishes this informative fact sheet on EC.

Other possible factors for the increased abortion rate in Spain merit investigation. For example, how prevalent were reproductive coercion and other forms of violence against the women studied? Women who are subjected to gender-based violence are far more likely to experience contraceptive sabotage, unintended pregnancies, and abortions.

And how did providers and communities educate, motivate, and support contraceptive users? Were they advised on how to share decisionmaking about family planning with their partners? On how to close the gap as much as possible between common use and correct and consistent use effectiveness rates?

These factors are harder to research than rates of contraceptive prevalence and abortion, but such research could boost the lifesaving effects of more family planning access.

Blog Posts, Past Actions

Not Impossible

Marysia

Marge Berer, editor of the journal Reproductive Health Matters, makes this highly problematic claim: "In my opinion, it is only possible to be anti-abortion if you will never be the one left holding the baby, nor be around to see or take responsibility for what happens to those who are." Really?

What about All Our Lives supporters and kindred spirits, in the present and in the past, who not only believe but live their lives as if prolife means what it says: the taking on, not the disavowal, of such active, thorough responsibilities? We can't possibly exist?

If respect and reverence for all life means anything, it means that you bother to hold the baby, or at the very least offer your helping hands to any and all baby holders, in your own family, community, nation, planet. You not only bear witness to their situations-you do whatever you can to ease their difficulties.

And that set of conjoint responsibilities begins towards both mother and child as soon as you know about the pregnancy. In fact, you should have long since already assumed the responsibilities that began well before the present pregnancy.

With the mother's and the father's own conceptions and beyond, with nonviolent and fully socially supported parenting, with sex education for all stages of life, with measures to prevent and abolish reproductive coercion and violence against women, with complete, informed, voluntary access to family planning.

Marge Berer, we do exist. We are not impossibilities by definition-let alone decree. And if you would like our help in reducing abortion, just ask.

Blog Posts

15 warning signs of reproductive coercion (and 6 steps you can take to protect your health)

Jen R

Great article by Lynn Harris at sexreally.com about recognizing and resisting reproductive coercion: 15 Warning Signs He Doesn’t Support Your Contraceptive Choices.

A sample:

  1. Does he refuse to wear a condom? “That’s near-universal with reproductive coercion, and can start on sexual-date-one,” says Heather Corinna, founder and director of Scarleteen and author of S.E.X.: The All-You-Need-To-Know Progressive Sexuality Guide to Get You Through High School and College.
  2. Does he equate birth control with cheating? As one woman (“Erika”) reported to the FVPF: “He said the pill made women want to have sex all the time, and that I’d cheat because I wouldn’t need to use a condom.”
  3. Do you go behind his back to get contraception? “Erika” snuck to a clinic for the pill. “For a year, I made sure he never saw them,” she says.

As they say, read the whole thing. And then pass it along to someone who might need this information.

Blog Posts

Reproductive health and partner abuse

Jen R

The Family Violence and Prevention Fund has a new fact sheet on reproductive health and partner abuse (PDF).

Sexual coercion and violence is a costly and pervasive problem, and women of reproductive age – in particular, those ages 16 to 24 – are at greatest risk.1 Violence limits women’s ability to manage their reproductive health and exposes them to sexually transmitted diseases. Abuse during pregnancy can have lasting harmful effects for a woman, the developing fetus and newborns. A growing body of research indicates that the strong association of intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy, abortion and sexually transmitted disease results from male coercive behaviors around sex and contraception.

This is an area where I'd like to see more activism from pro-life advocates outside of the establishment Movement. Most of us agree that a woman has the right to make her own decisions about contraception, and all of us agree that she has the right to make her own decisions about whether and when to have sex. A concerted educational and activist campaign against reproductive coercion could make a real difference in the rates of unintended pregnancy and abortion — not to mention in the lives of women.