Some facts about contraception by Michelle Murphy I was compelled to write this column in response to Jeffrey M. Palun's article "Contraception leads to more abortions" which appeared in the News Record, Tuesday, April, 14 1998. [sic] Palun's article was based on a speech given by a "doctor" during a weekend function he attended at Indiana University sponsored by Collegians Activated to Liberate Life. Palun's article included sections of "Dr. Monica Miller's" speech about the supposed "link" between contraception and abortion. The article was full of inaccurate, non-medically based, illogical information and biased political dogma about contraception, pregnancy and abortion. While it was not apparent from the article just what kind of "doctor" Monica Miller is, it was obvious that she is part of a vocal, yet minor segment of anti-choice doctors who have no qualms about ignoring medical.fact [sic] (and research) in favor of individual, conservative morality. Her personal opinion of when a pregnancy begins is NOT medically-accepted doctrine and should not be viewed as such. Palun and Miller both support political definitions (created by anti-choice zealots) of abortion and pregnancy rather than actual definitions based on medical facts. This conservative ideology is further evident by Dr. Miller's ludicrous presumption that 50 years ago people only had sex to have children. If she knew anything about the history of sexual relations she would know that 50 years ago (or any time in history) many people had sex for reasons other than procreation. (Maybe Dr. Miller should have taken some history courses in college). Let me attempt to shed somelight (and truth) on the inaccurate, illogical, and simply wrong information presented in Palun's article. First, I will respond to the belief that almost all forms of contraception are actually forms of abortion. To begin let's clarify a few terms: (1) abortion is defined in medical literature as "the termination of an established pregnancy;" (2) pregnancy is defined in medical literature as "the implantation of a fertilized egg in the woman's uterus" (for the more technically minded) "the interval from the completion of implantation of the blastocyst in the uterus until parturition"--(Institute of Medicine); (3) contraception is defined in as [sic] "methods (barrier, chemical, hormonal) used to prevent pregnancy by either preventing contraception or implantation." So, if using contraception prevents pregnancy and one must be pregnant to abort, contraception is not abortion. Most readers should be able to follow me. A course in logic is not required. According to Palun's article, Dr. Miller claims that oral contraceptive pills, emergency contraceptive pills, Depo-Provera, Norplant, and IUDs are abortifacients, (they work by aborting established pregnancies.) Almost all physicians say this is NOT the case. Contraception works to PREVENT PREGNANCY (remember, no pregnancy--no abortion). The following is a summary of how contraceptives/birth control methods work: oral contraceptive pills, emergency contraceptive pills (previously called "the morning after pill"), Depo-Provera, and Norplant all work to prevent pregnancy in three possible ways. The first and primary way (for most methods) is by inhibiting ovulation (preventing the release of the egg into the Fallopian tube). The second possible way they work to prevent pregnancy is by inhibiting fertilization (thickening the cervical mucus to prohibit sperm from passing through--the IUD also prevents fertilization by killing sperm.) The third way is by inhibiting implantation [of the embryo] in the uterus (changes the lining of the uterus.) All of these methods ultimately prevent pregnancy and are therefore not abortifacients. Palun is obviously unaware of the medical definitions and FACTS. Once again, without implantation there is NO pregnancy--without pregnancy there cannot be an ABORTION! This is basic logic! Needless to say, Dr. Miller's statement that "if they [the parents] have been having sex, without any other form of birth control Uust [sic, just] using oral contraceptives], for more than three weeks, chances are they've had at least one abortion" is completely FALSE. Palun asserts that drug companies define the above mentioned methods as "contraceptives" and it's one of the few points in the article that is accurate. However, while drug companies are correct in defining these methods as contraceptives, drug companies do not define what constitutes contraception rather, the medical community does. According to Palun, Miller also claims to have a theory that our culture's "contraceptive mindset" leads to abortion as "the next logical step." This is NOT even remotely logical. Rather, the only logical (and proven) theory is that a "contraceptive mindset" prevents abortion AND leads to planned pregnancies and planned parenting by allowing women and men to control their fertility (and have children when they want them). The only true link between contraception and abortion is that contraception and abortion is that contraception PREVENTS abortion. Maybe Miller should have taken a course in logic while she was in college. Finally, I did agree with Palun on his last piece of advice. I agree that you should ask your doctor about birth control (and STD prevention) and how the methods actually work. I also wholeheartedly agree with his statement that most doctors will tell you that contraceptives are not abortifacients... because that is the TRUTH! I encourage students who fall prey to such misinformation as Palun did, to get the facts for themselves and to question information--even from people with titles such as "Dr." before their name. One place on campus to find medically accurate (rather than politically motivated) information on contraceptive options is the UC Wellness Office located in Tangemn University Center. Michelle Murphy is a graduating senior in health promotion and education and a volunteer peer educatorfor [sic] the UC Wellness Office. This article was taken from the May 6, 1998 issue of The News Record, the Return to the Main Page