Is there a logical contradiction in the concept of a perfect contraceptive method? Some hidden problem, which cannot be overcome with even a very advanced technology? This is the trick with hypothetical scenarios. As long as there is no logical contradiction involved, no matter how far-out the thought experiment might be, it needs an answer - ONLY because the church keeps making black-and-white assertions and commandments.
The concept of “perfect contraception” is logical, but not reasonable. Every type of contraception fails, with different rates. Some fail rarely, while some fail very frequently.
This is from the Guttmacher Institute’s “In the Know” web page, based on “typical” sexual behavior…
The percentage of U.S. women initiating use of a method who will become pregnant during their first year of use, by method.
Method / Perfect Use / Typical Use
Implant (Implanon) / 0.05 / 0.05
Vasectomy / 0.10 / 0.15
Tubal sterilization / 0.5 /0.5
IUD
Copper-T (ParaGard) / 0.6 / 0.8
Levonorgestrel-releasing (Mirena) / 0.2 / 0.2
Three-month injectable (Depo-Provera) / 0.2 / 6
Vaginal ring (NuvaRing) / 0.3 / 9
Patch (Ortho Evra) / 0.3 / 9
Pill (combined estrogen and progestin) / 0.3 / 9
Diaphragm / 6 /12
Male condom / 2 /18
Female condom / 5 / 21
Sponge
Women who have had a child / 20 / 24
Women who have never had a child / 9 / 12
Withdrawal / 4 / 22
Fertility awareness-based methods (
NFP) / – / 24
Standard Days Method (calendar) (
NFP) / 5 / –
TwoDay Method (post-ovulation) (
NFP) / 4 /–
Ovulation method (
NFP) / 3 /–
Symptothermal method (
NFP) / 0.4 /–
Spermicides / 18 / 28
No method / 85 / 85
*Notes: The first year of use includes women who have used that method in the past. “Perfect use” denotes effectiveness among couples who use the method both consistently and correctly; “typical use” refers to effectiveness experienced among all couples who use the method (including inconsistent and incorrect use). Sources: references 14–16.
*
It’s incorrect to think of “perfect contraception.” Like any activity of every day life, there are risks. When we get in the car, we don’t expect that we’ll get in an accident, but every year, tens of thousands of people die in car crashes.
I think it is about time to conclude that there is no rational argument against the concept of contraception. But if you or anyone else can come up with one, I am all ears.
How’s this argument? Behavioral economics.
Contraception is really about reinforcing a particular type of behavior, and the type of contraception you use (artificial or NFP) reflects the type of behavior you wish to pursue. Contraception changes the “opportunity cost” of engaging in sexual intercourse, relative to a position of chastity or marital continence.
Without artificial contraception, the opportunity cost of sexual intercourse are based on the desire to avoid two outcomes: (1) pregnancy and (2) contraction of sexually-transmitted infections (STIs). Artificial contraception reduces the likelihood that either of these two outcomes will occur as a result of having sex. As a result, the “opportunity cost” of sexual behavior is lower, relative to chastity or marital continence.
Artificial contraception and abortion together comprise a fairly effective way of insuring sexual behavior from unintended pregnancy or STI.
There is very clear evidence that artificial contraception and abortion are interchangeably used as insurance against unintended pregnancy and STI.
One good set of empirical studies evaluates the effect of abortion liberalization on gonorrhea infection rates. Here’s
one example. It turns out, when abortion laws are liberalized, the rates of gonorrhea infection rise, because the “opportunity cost” of sex without contraception is lower.
Another
good study evaluates the effect of parent-notification abortion laws on gonorrhea infection rates in young women. It turns out that when parent-notification laws go into effect, gonorrhea rates decline, because the “opportunity cost” of sex without contraction is higher. Having to tell mom or dad that you’re a pregnant teenager seems to be a spur for young people to reduce the frequency with which they have “risky” sex.
So, what is the rational argument against contraception? It’s behavioral.
If you wish to contemplate a perfectly realistic scenario, look at a slightly modified version of the “young couple”. Suppose that the protection is not absolutely foolproof, but the couple is willing to take the risk, and if there is a failure, they are willing to accept it, and keep the child. Their life (as they anticipated it) will have to be changed, and they are willing to do that, too. Is there are rational reason to condemn their practice? After all they do exactly the same as another couple who use the (
UN)natural family planning.
The problem here is that the plural of “anecdote” is not “data.” Actually, if you look at abortion rates from the Centers for Disease Control an Prevention, the odds that a teenage pregnancy ends in abortion is very high. Among teenagers less than 15 years old, the ratio of abortions to live births is roughly 1:1. Among teenagers 15-19 years old, the ratio of abortions to live births is roughly 1:4. Among women 20-29 years old, the ratio is roughly 1:4.5.
I would applaud your hypothetical couple, but the *behavioral *evidence is that people who want to live another lifestyle very often will seek an abortion. Again, there are empirical studies here…
