Question about Morning after Pill and Planned Parenthood

[BlueRain]

I’ve never been to Planned Parenthood or a clinic for any type of pills. But once in a phone call with a friend of mine, she mentioned that she had taken the Morning After Pill a couple of times.

I was stunned. She’s not exactly religious. She’s the “norm” for a person in this society and she was having sex with her boyfriend. But, I didn’t say anything.

My question is this though, when you go to one of those places, do they explain exactly how the pill works?

My understanding is that the Morning after Pill prevents implentation, it doesn’t prevent the egg and sperm from joing. To me that’s the same as leaving a newborn baby out in a forest to fend for itself. To me it’s like abortion because you’re not giving the life in you a chance to grow. It’s already a life and you’re depriving that life of what it needs to live.

So do those places that give you that pill explain that to you? Because I don’t know if she knows what she really did. I remember once I heard Dr.Drew on that radio show “LoveLine” how great the Morning After Pill was because it would prevent abortions. I want to call there one day and give him my two cents. I’ll probably get attacked, but a lot of young people listen to that show.

Either way, I plan to tell her. We don’t talk much anymore. I just really didn’t know how to handle it and I was uncomfortable. I feel like a prude and an outsider. It might break our already fading friendship.

Do you memembers consider the Morning after Pill a form of abortion? I do.

 

[pira114]

I think most people, presented with the facts, would have to consider the morning after pill a form of abortion. At least I’ve never seen any evidence to the contrary.

I doubt you’ll find too many on this forum that would not consider it abortive.

 

[Island_Oak]

Likewise, as the Catholic Catechism recognizes when discussing offenses against the 6th commandment, rape “is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person” and “an intrinsically evil act” (no. 2356). By implication, sexual assault cannot be considered ordered to the unitive and procreative functions.

Thus, according to the U.S. Catholic Bishops in their Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, a woman “who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault” (Directive 36). She is not obliged when raped, as would be the case in consensual relations, to accommodate the natural potential for conception. The forced introduction of sperm is an act of aggression she may resist even through means that prevent the creation of new life. That explains why Catholic hospitals may distribute contraceptives in some rape cases, particularly within 24 hours after the assault. Immediate care is essential as well to address issues related to the transmission of venereal disease and for appropriate and compassionate trauma counseling.

 

[Philip76]

If that is allowed (the distribution of contraceptives to Cahtolics in rape cases) then I would expect that it would only be methods which prevent conception that are allowed. Any method that acts after conception and brings about the death of an already existing embryo would be an abortion and that could not be justified in any circumstances.

 

[pira114]

Philip76:

If that is allowed (the distribution of contraceptives to Cahtolics in rape cases) then I would expect that it would only be methods which prevent conception that are allowed. Any method that acts after conception and brings about the death of an already existing embryo would be an abortion and that could not be justified in any circumstances.

Artificial Contraception is not allowed. In the example you gave above, it would require prior knowledge that one would be raped anyway. I would hope that doesn’t happen very often.

 

[Seatuck]

Yes, the methods would be to prevent conception in the case of rape. A drug that would prevent ovulation for instance. Notice testing is supposed to occur. Spermicides have been allowed. Internal cleansing methods.

The rest of the quoted paragraph-

If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum.19

usccb.org/bishops/directives.shtml

 

[SueKrum]

I don’t think the woman she was refering to war raped. she took it like someone would use a condom. a “just in case” measure. and yes, that is wrong.

a lot of people are actually lied to about what happens. my siste rbelieves that the morning after pill does not cause and abortion. she says it just flushes the system and prevents conception if it has not accured yet. this is a lie perpetuated by the media to christians who are in favor of contraception that is not abortive.

 

[Tonks40]

To me, “the proof is in the pudding” so-to-speak…

I talked with a co-worker who is in an unmarried, but stable, relationship, and she told me that she went to Planned Parenthood to take the “morning-after” pill because she felt she was pregnant and didn’t feel that a baby was right for her at this time. It occurred over a weekend, and when she came back Monday morning and told me, you can see that she was down. She said, “I know that taking the morning-after pill isn’t the same as abortion, but I feel really bad about doing it - I know it’s wrong somehow.”

No, they don’t truly explain what happens at PP when you take the pill. If they did, I wouldn’t see the hundreds of medical claims coming across my desk of women who seek this. (I’m a med claims examiner.) The numbers are pretty mind-boggling - 20-30 or more a DAY!

 

[1ke]

BlueRain:

My question is this though, when you go to one of those places, do they explain exactly how the pill works?

As a veteran sidewalk counselor outside PP, I can tell you the answer to that is a resounding NO.

BlueRain:

My understanding is that the Morning after Pill prevents implentation, it doesn’t prevent the egg and sperm from joing. To me that’s the same as leaving a newborn baby out in a forest to fend for itself. To me it’s like abortion because you’re not giving the life in you a chance to grow. It’s already a life and you’re depriving that life of what it needs to live.

The MAP is simply a very large dose of the same hormones in birth control pills taken over a number of hours to pump the woman’s system full of these hormones. If a woman has not ovulated, the goal of the MAP is to delay ovulation or completely suppress ovulation. If the woman has just ovulated, then the MAP works to try to inhibit implantation-- which you rightly recognize as an abortion.

But, not knowing where in the cycle a woman is when she takes it, this is all really a shot in the dark. The MAP could have absolutely no impact and she could still become pregnant. It could be completely unnecessary, if a woman is in the first few or last few days of her cycle. It could work to inhibit ovulation. It could work to inhibit implantation. Therefore, it is very difficult to tell what, if anything, it’s doing at all. It is certainly not a morally licit thing to do regardless.

BlueRain:

So do those places that give you that pill explain that to you?

No they don’t. But, they also don’t believe it’s a life-- at any point. PP is the largest abortion chain in the US. So, no they see no problem with this. They don’t define pregnancy as beginning until after implantation-- and even after it is a pregnancy, they have no problem “terminating” it. They don’t even tell women who are having abortions that it is a baby inside them-- they refer to it as a “product of conception” or a “blob of cells”.

BlueRain:

I remember once I heard Dr.Drew on that radio show “LoveLine” how great the Morning After Pill was because it would prevent abortions. I want to call there one day and give him my two cents. I’ll probably get attacked, but a lot of young people listen to that show.

I am not familiar with Dr. Drew, but yes you should call in with the facts. There are some great brochures on the subject you can get from www.omsoul.com.

BlueRain:

Do you memembers consider the Morning after Pill a form of abortion? I do.

It can be.

 

[astegallrnc]

BlueRain:

My question is this though, when you go to one of those places, do they explain exactly how the pill works?.

I don’t know what most places do; however, I always explained the natural menstrual cycle and how hormonal contaception prevents pregnancy when pescribing any hormonal contraceptive. I discussed the three mechanisms of action listed on the package insert, which each woman was given. The three mechanisms of action were also part of our clinic’s counseling protocol, so the information should have been disucssed during the counseling process.

I remember once I heard Dr.Drew on that radio show “LoveLine” how great the Morning After Pill was because it would prevent abortions. I want to call there one day and give him my two cents. I’ll probably get attacked, but a lot of young people listen to that show.

That is because of the word dance. Abortion ends a pregnancy… pregnancy doesn’t begin until implantation according to the PP crowd. Who came up with that definition of pregnancy?

Do you memembers consider the Morning after Pill a form of abortion? I do

I consider all hormonal contraceptives (pills, shot, etc.) and the IUD possible abortifacients.

Autumn

 

[BlueRain]

Thnak You 1ke and Astegallrnc for your information. I know that my friend didn’t use the pill, she used a condom, but sometimes they would forget.

I think I’ll try to bring up the matter in “gentle” way if possible. Thank you all again.