In regards to the Connecticut Catholic Bishops statement on Plan B (morning after pill) and Catholic Hospitals: As a family practice physician who has been trained as a medical consultant for the Creighton Model NFP, I am appalled at this statement. It says that Catholic hospitals will be allowed to give the MAP to rape victims and all they have to do is have a negative pregnancy test. It claims that giving the morning after pill (MAP) would not be considered an abortion. This is misleading, because the MAP can act as an abortifacient.
What is the MAP? It is the same hormones as are in the oral contraceptive (OCP), only a much, much larger dose.
How does it work? There are 3 ways. 1)Prevent the release of an egg from the ovary (ovulation); 2)Slow down transport of the sperm or egg (or the fertilized egg, also called a baby); and 3)Change the lining of the uterus to prevent the implantation of the fertilized egg (also called the blastocyst, also known as a baby). Preventing the implantation of the blastocyst (baby) is an abortion! There is no getting around this.
One problem is that the manufacturers and other interested parties (oh, I don't know, lets see, maybe... Planned Parenthood? Just a wild guess) are trying to change the definition of conception to mean implanting in the uterus, that way they can say that the MAP only prevents conception. Conception is when the sperm and egg unite in the fallopian tube and a new human being is now present. Therefore the MAP can and does act as abortifacient.
That said there is no reliable means to discern whether or not a woman is pregnant when she asks for the MAP. For example a woman could be 4 days pregnant when she is raped and an ovulation test and a pregnancy test would both be negative and if given the MAP an early abortion could ensue. Alternatively, a woman could have ovulated 12 hours prior to the rape and the egg is making its way toward the uterus and by the time the woman comes to the hospital she could already be pregnant (it has been shown that sperm can make it to the fallopian tubes within 5 minutes) and there would be no way to know this. If you could know with 100% certainty that a woman was not pregnant, then there would be no problem with administering the MAP.
Rape is a terrible thing, but it doesn't justify the potential killing of a human life.
Posted by Janet
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You wrote:
"One problem is that the manufacturers and other interested parties (oh, I don't know, lets see, maybe... Planned Parenthood? Just a wild guess) are trying to change the definition of conception to mean implanting in the uterus, that way they can say that the MAP only prevents conception."
I remember the days (just in the last decade!) when not many in either pro-life or pro-abort camps knew about the Pill's mechanism of preventing implantation of the newly conceived person. So, now they're trying to redefine "conception" to mean "implantation?"
Well, that tidies up many problems for them, doesn't it? The Pill, the MAP, in-vitro fertilization, embryonic research, just to name a few.
Father, forgive them; they know not what they do!
Post a Comment