Oral Contraceptives and the Struggle for Reproductive Freedom and Women's Rights

There is a sad and simple truth that more women need to realize. The fight for women's rights is NOT over! If you value your ability to plan the size of your family, then you must take a stand and protect women's ability to access oral contraception.

Women's liberation was made possible by, among other things, the invention of the oral contraceptive pill (OCP). As a reliable form of birth control, one that could largely be controlled by the woman, became available, more women were free to pursue an education and enter the work force. Unfortunately, there are those who believe that OCP is an abortifacient, that it aborts an unborn child and want to prevent women from gaining access to OCP. On July 15, Robert Pear of the New York Times reported that Secretary Leavitt of the Health and Human Services Agency and President Bush are planning to

require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control.

According to NARAL: Pro-Choice America:

• This regulation could undermine good state laws that require hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape survivors and ensure that pharmacies fill women’s prescriptions for birth control.
• The proposal could allow health-care corporations (hospitals, HMOs, and health plans) to refuse to provide services or make referrals for birth control.
• The proposed regulation could affect Medicaid and the Title X family-planning program. For instance, staff at clinics or health-care plans that contract for Medicaid services could refuse to provide contraception.

In her blog on Reality Check, Christina notes that this legislation is "a spectacular act of complicity with the religious right."

We have already seen changes to policies in 2004 at the Center for Disease Control, where condoms are no longer advocated as the best defense against sexually transmitted disease. We have also recently witnessed various attempts to remove access to late term abortions on the state level in South Dakota, which resulted in a law requiring doctors to tell women seeking an abortion that they are terminating the "the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being."

We can not continue to allow policy to be shaped by ideological beliefs over scientific fact as well as the pressing reality of overpopulation and the global benefits of women's ability to control reproduction.

Oral contraceptives suppress ovulation; increase the accumulation of mucus in the cervical tubes, which make it difficult for sperm to reach an egg; and impede the thickening of the endometrium, which is where a fertilized egg, or blastocyst, typically is implanted for development into an embryo.

In a recent issue of Ethics and Medicine Dr. J. Goodnough critiques a argument made by Dr. R. Alcorn that OCP is an abortifacient because, at times, ovulation does occur, eggs can be fertilized, and, therefore, embryos may die.

According to Dr. Alcorn, OCP is an abortifacent because some breakthrough ovulation can occur. If this happens, then there is the chance an egg will be fertilized but unable to implant due to the thinning of the endometrium. Dr. Goodnough argues that OCP has a .1% pregnancy rate, which means about 3% of users will become pregnant even while taking OCP. However, he believes this rate is mainly accounted for by missed pills. One should not assume that breakthrough ovulation is a common occurrence.

Dr. Goodnough also argues that there is no actual proof that the endometrium is made so hostile as to cause death for an embryo. Goodnough states:

he could just as easily assume that the embryo always implants and survives despite seemingly hostile changes in the endometrium. Or, more accurately stated, he could say that the embryo implants and survives as frequently in those on the OCP as happens in those not on the OCP, since embryo loss occurs in an estimated 70 % of fertilizations in women not taking the OCP. Fifteen percent of these embryos die immediately after fertilization, 15 % fail to implant, and 41 % are lost after implantation.

In other words, a sexually active woman using OCP is just as likely to experience the loss of an embryo as a sexually active woman not using OCP.

Oral contraception pills prevent ovulation and impede fertilization. It is not clear the extent that they inhibit implantation of a fertilized egg.

Do not be lured by ideological slants on research. OCP is not an abortifacient.

But, for arguments sake, let's say that OCP is an abortifacient, would that reality give health practitioners the right to refuse to prescribe or fill prescriptions for OCP? Do we really want to empower health practitioners with the right to make choices based on their religious values when they serve the public health? What if we were to allow teachers in public schools the same right? Would you be partial to allowing an educator to refuse to teach students who did not share his/her religious values? Perhaps an educator might refuse to teach a segment of history that did not meet his or her belief system? Maybe educators who do not believe the holocaust existed should not have to teach about it. Perhaps educators who believe democrat values are really a psychological illness can fail students who do not demonstrate republican beliefs and refer them to the nurse?

Those who serve the public do not get to make choices based on religious or partisan values. They must make choices that serve the common good and reflect the will of the people as demonstrated through democratic processes, and they must be conscious and respectful of reason and scientific evidence.

Thankfully, many members of Congress are speaking out on behalf of OCP and family planning. According to Matthew Jaffe of ABC news,

More than 100 members of Congress wrote President Bush today, urging him to "halt all action" on a proposal they argue would change the definition of abortion, and drastically limit women's access to birth control.

We should not take this proposed legislation lightly. Write your Senators and Congressmen to tell them where you stand on this issue.

Write Sec. Leavitt at secretary@hhs.gov and explain to him why you support a woman's right to control her fertility and to plan her family.

Race for Tibet!

As we get closer to the realization of the 2008 Olympic games it become more apparent to observers that China is not getting any better at addressing the human rights issues, for which they have received much criticism from the international committee.

People with the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) and the Australian Tibet Council are worried that China will use its Olympic charter to legitimize their presence in Tibet, misrepresenting present conditions. They have developed an Olympic mascot using the Tibetan antelope, perhaps in an attempt to lighten the weight of the fact that they are invaders to Tibet and its people.

The Race for Tibet campaign, initiated by the International Campaign for Tibet, is asking people to sign a petition demanding that China improve its human right conditions and urging the Chairman of the International Olympic Council to maintain its integrity and hold nations accountable and dedicated to peace.

The ITC sees the Beijing 2008 Olympic games as a way to draw attention to the human rights issues in Tibet. Many people pay attention to the Olympics. 302 nations are expected to compete in 28 sports in the 2008 Olympics. In 2004 according to information on Wikipedia.This campaign has links that will guide you to the various ways you can help make important human rights policies become a reality in Tibet.

It is unfortunate that the campaign to Free Tibet has remained a fringe issue for so long. The Chinese invaded Tibet in 1949. 58 years later the government of Tibet and his Holiness the Dali Lama are still in exile.

If you are not familiar with this issue, the ITC offers many fact sheets and as well as a brief question and answer site. If you would like to use this platform to help educate friends, acquaintances, neighbors, or co-workers who are not well-informed about Tibet, but who love the Olympics, then this is your chance to work your liberal politics into the conversation! The Race for Tibet site has also created fliers you can post around town, in the coffee shop, in the mail room, or at the grocery store.

Millions of people follow the Olympics, but few are aware of the human rights issues in China and Tibet. Please use this campaign to help build awareness. You can offer your assistance from your desk! This campaign is an excellent example of how the Internet is making mass involvement possible.