hormonal birth control as a cause of abortion
A topic that rarely gets any attention, even among many who consider
themselves pro-life, is the controversy surrounding hormonal birth
control (that is, birth control pills, injections and patches) and whether
or not they cause early abortions. There is no debate that hormonal
birth control works, at least some of the time, to prevent conception
(in other words, it is a contraceptive). However, there is some
evidence that hormonal birth control also prevents implantation of a
newly formed human (in other words, it is an abortifacient). For those
people who claim to believe that all human beings are deserving of
equal protection, this issue needs to be given careful consideration.
Below are links to research and further writings on the topic that I
hope will give more clarity to the issue.
Randy Alcorn, a pro-life activist and thinker, has
put together a very extensive booklet entitled "Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions?". Although
Randy has not done any original scientific research in this area is has
done an extensive review of the medical and scientific literature on
this topic as well as seeking expert opinion. Besides presenting
evidence that hormonal birth control does cause abortion, this booklet
contains a good analysis of the moral aspects of this issue. His
booklet, along with several related resources, is online at http://www.epm.org/bcp.html.
Drs. Walter Larimore and Joseph Stanford published an article in the
medical journal, Archives of Family Medicine in February 2000 entitled
"Postfertilization Effects of Oral Contraceptives and Their
Relationship to Informed Consent". This article is a review of the
scientific evidence regarding the abortifacient nature of hormonal
birth control. The full text of the article is available online at http://archfami.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/9/2/126.
Of special note is that both Randy Alcorn and Walter Larimore (and
possibly Joseph Stanford) have significant reason to want hormonal
birth control to not be abortifacient. Randy Alcorn and his wife used
birth control pills for many years and Walter Larimore is a family
doctor who, prior to his own research into the topic, prescribed
hormonal birth control. As well, neither of these men is opposed to
pure contraceptives. In my mind these factors makes their work much less suspect
of significant bias than it might otherwise be.
If you would like further information on this topic, I would recommend
looking at the bibliographies of both of the above resources. The one in
Randy Alcorn's booklet is especially extensive.
For the sake of completeness, I should mention two papers put out by
two different groups of pro-life obstetricians and gynecologists. One
paper argues that hormonal birth control is not abortifacient and the
other argues that it is. However, in my opinion, both papers are based
on unfortunate stretches of logic. I did not find either very
convincing. As well, both papers are written by groups who have a motivation
to reach the conclusion that they have. The first
paper is written by doctors who prescribe hormonal birth control in
their practices and therefore have incentive to avoid the discomfort
and disruption that discontinuing that practice would cause. As well,
it is difficult for anyone to come to the conclusion that they have
been involved in a morally unjustifiable practice, even if unknowingly
so. The second paper is written by a group of doctors who believe that
all contraceptives are by their very nature wrong. This group obviously
has the motivation of wanting to get other pro-life people onside with
their cause to do away with all birth control. Both papers are
available online from the American Association of Pro Life
Obstetricians and Gynecologists at http://www.aaplog.org/oral.htm.
return to joel.mawhorter.org