(From http://www.NoRoomforContraception.com)
Abortion rights advocates have been accusing the pro-life movement of trying to redefine pregnancy and reclassify certain contraceptives as abortifacients. In essence, they have been charging that the movement has not been telling the truth about contraception but instead has been playing word games in an effort to ban it.
The truth is, it was the abortion rights and family planning movements that have been playing word games for the past few decades, and the pro-life movement is simply trying to correct the damage.
This decades old controversy revolves around the definition of a single word: conception.
Up until the mid sixties, the question of the beginning of pregnancy wasn't a subject of serious debate. It was well accepted, based upon sound science, that, that conception occurred at fertilization (that is, the union of sperm and egg).
It was also accepted that anything which prevented implantation in fact caused an abortion, as recognized by the US Government and described in a 1963 public health service leaflet:
"All the measures which impair the viability of the zygote [newly created human] at any time between the instant of fertilization [union of sperm and egg] and the completion of labor constitute, in the strict sense, procedures for inducing abortion" [1]
This acknowledgement posed a problem for the family planning movement which was moving away from "pure" contraceptives and more towards drugs which also caused early abortions by preventing implantation of a newly created human being. The only way to make these drugs legally and morally acceptable to the general public was to change the definition of conception.
This is where the American Academy of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) stepped in. In 1965 the ACOG issued a medical bulletin which "officially" changed the definition of conception from union of sperm and egg to implantation: "Conception is the implantation of a fertilized ovum [egg]. [2]
Suddenly, under this new definition, drugs which were recognized as abortifacients now only prevented pregnancy and could now be called contraceptives.
The excuse the ACOG gave for the change was that fertilization could not be detected a fact that had been already well established. Prior to 1965, this flawed reasoning was never formally accepted as reason for change. It was political agenda, not scientific progress, which prompted the change by the ACOG it had nothing to do with advances in biology, embryology, or gynecology.
As a result of this change, over the decades women have been told that their contraceptives drugs didnt cause abortions, and that they would not work if they were already pregnant and therefore morally acceptable.
But this is deceptive and based upon misinformation and distortion of scientific fact. Changing a definition does not change reality that a womans body is carrying a distinct and new human being and hence pregnant, whether or not that fact is detectable.
Women arent being told the entire truth about their contraceptives, and its time for members of the ACOG to tell their patients the truth.
The same deception is being played out in the debate over emergency contraception. Notice what the makers of Plan B state regarding how their drug works:
"Plan BŽ is similar to a birth control pill and is believed to act as an emergency contraceptive by: Altering the endometrium, which may inhibit implantation Plan BŽ is not effective once the process of implantation has begun; it will not affect an existing pregnancy... "[3]
The ACOG has been heavily promoting Plan B with its Ask Me emergency contraception campaign. In essence, they are peddling drugs which are capable of causing early abortions as a solution to preventing abortion. It doesnt take much to realize that abortion isnt prevented with an earlier abortion.
Pro-life advocates are not changing definitions they are simply restoring them to their scientific meanings, free of agenda driven bias. If the pro-choice crowd can't do this because many contraceptives would be known as abortion drugs, that is no one's fault but their own.
Footnotes
[1] Public Health Service Leaflet no. 1066, US Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1963, 27
[2] American College of Gynecology Terminology Bulletin (September 1965)
[3] The official Plan B website, For Prescribers: How Plan B Works.
http://www.NoRoomforContraception.com
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ruben Obregon is the the President and co-founder of No Room for Contraception. He has worked in the pro-family movement for the past 16 years on issues ranging from education to marriage.
