Who would have ever thought that the subject of contraception would ever dominate the airwaves? Nothing really surprises me anymore, however, when it comes to things to argue about. And this topic has become a great source of argument lately (and here I am writing about it....) Here's the current situation as best I understand it.
1. The Catholic Church embraces the position that contraception is wrong and it is against their teachings. Prior to 1930, nearly all Protestant religions agreed with the Catholic Church's longstanding position on this subject. The primary Biblical justification for this is Genesis 38: 8-10. The Anglican Church at its 1930 Lambeth Conference announced that contraception would be allowed under certain circumstances. Over time they and all other Protestant religions changed their position to "allow" contraception across the board. In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued the landmark encyclical letter, Humanae Vitae (Latin- "Human Life") reaffirming the Catholic Church's historic position that contraception is wrong. And the Catholic Church's position on abortion is well known.
2. In 1965, the US Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut ruled that the Constitution protected a right to privacy. The Court, by a 7-2 margin, ruled that a Connecticut law, prohibiting the use of contraceptives, to be invalid on the grounds that it violated the "right to marital privacy."
3. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which was signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010 requires that insurance plans cover female contraceptives and contraceptive counseling without cost-sharing. Churches and houses of worship could choose to opt out of offering this coverage on religious grounds. The Obama administration decided that Catholic hospitals and universities, however, were not exempt from this mandate. After a significant backlash from the Catholic Church and others who posit that this is a violation of religious liberty, the administration offered a compromise position that the insurance companies themselves (not the Catholic institution employer) be required to cover the cost of this coverage to allow the Catholic Church to "not have to pay" for something they held as being against their teachings. The controversy remains active, especially since the presidential primary season is in full swing. I'm sure the insurance companies may have something to say about this new cost but, we'll leave that alone for now.
So, just what is meant by "contraception?" ...contra (meaning against) and [con]ception (meaning fertilization) Contraception is used to prevent sperm from fertilizing the female egg. This can be accomplished by the physical barrier method including the condom, cervical cap, and diaphragm. Hormonal barriers inhibit ovulation and fertilization and include injectable and oral contraceptives. "The Pill" is the most common form of hormonal contraceptive. The methods listed are not intended to be exhaustive.
Then there is contragestion. Contra (against) and gestation (generally meaning the implantation of the fertilized egg) This method of preventing a fertilized egg from normally implanting into the uterus includes intrauterine devices (IUD) as well as some "emergency" hormonal treatments. Certain methods and devices can be either contraceptive or contragestive depending on when they are used. Again, the ones mentioned are not intended to be an exhaustive list. I assume these are also included in the administration's mandate since they are typically referred to as contraceptives.
Then there are abortifacients. These are substances intended to end gestation by terminating the pregnancy. RU-486 (aka the abortion pill) is one of the pharmaceuticals used. It's ingredient is mifepristone which, when administered in a 600 mg dose up to 49 days gestation, (without getting overly graphic) causes the embryo to shed. If "successful" it is followed two days later by a dose of misoprostol which causes contractions. No need to elaborate.
Mifespristone in a 10 mg dose is also used as an emergency contraceptive. It is believed that it prevents ovulation (the production of the egg) rather than preventing implantation. So, this drug, in differing doses, can both prevent pregnancy as well as end pregnancy. Is this drug also covered? In what dose?
My simple conclusion is:
Contraceptives are intended to prevent a sperm from fertilizing an egg (or preventing the egg production itself)
Contragestives are intended to prevent or interrupt a fertilized egg from implanting into the uterus
Abortifacients are intended to terminate an implanted embryo/fetus
Most people (including the majority of Catholics) don't have issues concerning the use of contraceptives. People might disagree on who should pay for it, though. Despite the position of the Catholic Church, the majority of Americans approve of the common methods used to prevent unwanted pregnancy.
But what is pregnancy? Is it when the sperm penetrates the egg, when the fertilized egg implants or some time after that?
Not to deliver a biology lesson (since I am not qualified) ...here is my understanding of the process:
1. Sperm penetrates the outer layer of the egg and egg releases cortical granules preventing any other sperm from penetrating
2. Sperm and egg nuclei fuse and a single cell zygote is formed
3. Day 1- cell splits into 2 cells
4. Day 2- 2 cells split into 4 cells
5. Day 3- now at the 6-12 cell stage
6. Day 4- now at the 16-32 cell stage
7. Day 6-7- "blastocyst" attaches to the endometrium and burrows in (implants) and it begins secreting HGC (hello morning sickness)
8. Day 7-10- major cellular reorganization into ectoderm, endoderm and mesoderm
9. Day 10-14- fluid amniotic cavity starts to form, yolk sack starts to form, embryo starts to form from embryonic disc, placenta starts to form
10. Day 15-21- emergence of vertebrate body plan
11. Week 3 to week 8- development of all organ systems (day 22 - heart begins to beat)
Is one of the issues central to both the contraception issue and the abortion issue the question of when life begins? Is it at the moment the sperm penetrates the egg? Is it when the fertilized egg implants into the uterine wall? Is it after 3 weeks? Is it when a fetus is viable outside the womb? I think many of us just want to put our hands over our ears and make that loud humming sound...we just don't want to have to hear the question and certainly don't want to answer it. In addition to the concern of the Catholic Church, many people have concerns that the federal government is trying to blur the line between contraception and abortion.
I think part of what gets people confused and upset about all this is the polarizing jargon. Is it birth control or pregnancy control? Is it pro-choice and anti-choice or pro-abortion and anti-abortion or pro-life and ....what? Is it contraception or contragestion or does it even matter? Is it "access to contraception" or is it "contraception paid for by someone else"? Is it women's rights or protection of the unborn? Is pregnancy a woman's health issue or the beginning of a new life, created by God? Is it providing affordable preventive care or infringing on religious liberty? Can the answer be yes to all of them? Probably not.
I met a young lady many years ago who came to a small, high school discussion group I was leading at church. We were discussing the topic of abortion (their chosen topic, not mine.) The discussion was lively and heated. Arguments for and against, justification because of medical necessity, rape, and incest were tossed into the mix. In the middle of all the shouting, this young lady, who was an out-of-town guest of one of our members, raised her hand and asked if she could say something. All eyes turned to this stranger. My paraphrase of what she said is this: "When my mother was a teenager, she was raped and she decided the best thing to do was to have an abortion. The drug they gave her didn't do what it was supposed to do and, for whatever reason, it didn't end the pregnancy. When the doctor told her what had happened (or didn't happen) she got scared and asked if she could still go through with the pregnancy. The doctor warned her of the possible medical issues for her and the baby but, said it was her decision. Nine months later she ended up giving birth to a healthy little girl. That little girl is me."
You could have heard a pin drop. To this day I don't know if that story she told was true. I have never seen her again. I have no reason to believe her story wasn't true. It had a profound impact on those dozen or so teenagers. And it had a profound impact on me. Here was a beautiful young lady sitting in front of us who came very close to never being born. What a tragedy that would have been.
People are passionate about many things. When our passions conflict, like they do on topics like this, society fractures more and more. What is the right answer? Who says so?
No comments:
Post a Comment