Emergency Contraception/Plan B

This has been quite a week! On Tuesday the Senate voted on the Paycheck Fairness Act (unfortunately opponents blocked the bill on a procedural vote) and on Thursday Judy Waxman, our VP of Health and Reproductive Rights, spoke on a panel at a White House town hall on women’s health. For your end-of-the-week reading we’ve got stories on new research on how emergency contraception works, a new book from ROC United, and an inspirational story of how teen athlete Meghan Vogel helped an opponent in need. Let’s get to it!

New research out this week shows that emergency contraception pills don’t work the way we think they do – and the way they really work should help squash some anti-abortion qualms about them. Read more »

In the past few days, there has been significant coverage of a New York Times article about emergency contraceptives and whether or not there is evidence that they prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg. It is great that this issue is getting coverage but it is not new information!!

For years, scientists and public health advocates have been pointing to the preponderance of scientific evidence, which shows no post-fertilization mechanism of action for emergency contraceptives (ECs). In multiple studies, no evidence has been found to indicate ECs inhibit implantation.

Before fertilization can occur, sperm must move into the oviduct (the tube connecting the ovary and uterus) where they can stay for up to five days before dying. If an egg is released, it signals to sperm to swim towards the egg and 24 hours or less for the egg and sperm to unite. If fertilization occurs, implantation takes place about a week later but there are a lot of reasons that an egg naturally would not implant. As a result, women are encouraged to take EC as quickly as possible after intercourse before it is too late to prevent pregnancy.

So why do the labels of these drugs include a statement that they may work by blocking fertilized eggs from implanting in a woman’s uterus? According to the New York Times article, it stems from an FDA decision during the drug-approval process to mention the possibility on the label based on outdated guesses about how ECs work. Read more »

While we’re still squabbling stateside about emergency contraception, women in London can now order Plan B online to be delivered to their home or office via bike messenger. (Note that we’re talking about Plan B, the “morning after pill,” not mifepristone, the chemical abortion pill that can end pregnancy of up to seven weeks, as Irin Carmon outlines at Slate.)

According to The Daily News, here’s how London-based women can obtain EC through this new service:

To get the emergency contraceptive in your hands quickly, the £20 (24 euros) service involves filling out a short online form that is assessed by an online doctor, with the prescription delivered by courier in as little as two hours.

I guess London didn’t want to be outdone by the vending machine in a university health center that distributes Plan B.

And here I thought it was handy that time I needed an urgent prescription refill the day I was leaving on a trip and was able to call my doctor’s office for a refill which was faxed over to my local CVS so I could pick it up on my way out of town. Read more »

Months later, I am still very concerned about the decision by the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) to overrule a judgment by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to expand over-the-counter availability of the morning-after contraception Plan B One Step. Anyone who is concerned about unintended pregnancy must support increased access to a range of contraceptive methods, including emergency contraception (EC).

The impact of unintended pregnancy among young women is staggering. Teen pregnancy, which is at unacceptably high levels in the United States and is higher than most other developed nations, has far-reaching consequences well into adulthood. Only about 50% of teen mothers receive a high school diploma by 22 years of old, versus about 90% of women who had not given birth during adolescence. And, dropping out of high school alters a young woman’s life for decades, and perhaps even generations. Why then would we not do everything we can—use every tool at our disposal—to increase access to emergency contraception? The stakes are too high, reducing unintended pregnancy is too important. Read more »

Shippensburg University recently made a controversial decision to sell emergency contraception or Plan B from vending machines in their student health center.  As a junior at American University, this decision does not seem controversial to me at all but instead a smart step in helping women make healthy decisions about their bodies.  Personally, I think that every college campus would benefit from selling Plan B.

Perhaps some of this controversy has risen because people do not understand the purpose of Plan B. Emergency contraception has been equated with the abortion pill, however; they are very different.  Forms of emergency contraception are safe and effective forms of birth control used after intercourse.  It does not work if the woman is already pregnant.  EC prevents pregnancy by delaying ovulation, and the fertilization of the egg. Therefore when a woman takes Plan B she is not aborting a fertilized egg, but instead preventing fertilization.  Read more »

Access to contraception without cost sharing is one of the many important gains for women in the Affordable Care Act. And it has become much more well-known in the last couple of months because of the kerfuffle on Capitol Hill and on talk radio. But here’s one of the in-the-weeds, wonky things about this provision of the law that has people in the reproductive rights community like me excited: the provision applies to emergency contraception. Read more »

Opponents of the recent contraceptive coverage announcement by the Department of Health & Human Services are trying to twist this major advance on contraception into a fight about abortion. In the Washington Post, Michael Gerson states that the rule requires Catholic-affiliated organizations to provide insurance coverage for "abortifacients." CNN's Belief Blog claims the new rule "forces employers to cover contraception and abortion." While both advance several faulty arguments, it's time to put to rest the claim about abortion. The rule is directly and explicitly limited to FDA-approved contraception. Read more »

Abortion. [uh-bawr-shuhn]

Contraception. [kon-truh-sep-shuhn]

These are not the same. Yet I’ve repeatedly seen claims that the HHS decision on contraceptive coverage requires religious employers to cover “abortifacients.”

Clearly, those opposed to the preventive services rule know they are on shaky ground when it comes to rallying their troops against contraception. After all, their troops are using the stuff en mass (but hopefully not in Mass). Ninety-eight percent of Catholics have used a form of contraception opposed by the Vatican. The “abortifacients” claim is based on the fact that the preventive services rule requires coverage for emergency contraception. Some still seem to think that EC causes an abortion. It does not. I repeat. It does not. If you don’t believe me, then turn to another source, like the Catholic Health Association. Read more »

It’s the first Friday of a new year – which means the first blog roundup of 2012 is here! There’s some good news and bad news to start the year off– but isn’t that how it always seems to be – including stories on the FBI’s definition of rape, advances for nursing mothers, the attack on a clinic in Florida, a fresh new model gracing the pages of Target and Nordstrom ads, and more on the recent Plan B decision. Read more »

Here’s to a new year.

Arriving at the National Women’s Law Center three months ago, I never anticipated just how sustained and systemic the efforts to dismantle women’s health and reproductive rights had become.  Sure, I had paid attention to the Planned Parenthood defunding fight (which included the “trade” for a ban on DC funding of abortion services and the “this is not meant to be a factual statement” debacle) and had heard about HR 3 and the disgusting “forcible rape” debate. Indeed, it was those events that informed my decision to work on reproductive rights issues full time. But even though I was aware of what was going on, it was only when I became involved with the issues on a daily basis where I gained a whole new perspective on just how far those who oppose reproductive rights are going in order to completely unravel women’s rights. And it got me thinking, if so many bad things can happen in just my three months here, what will 2012 look like?

So in order to be prepared for this year, I decided to give a quick review of my first three months – a recap of the numerous anti-choice measures that cropped up in just the final months of 2011. Because when you lay it all out, you can’t ignore how serious these efforts really are.

In my very first week, the House of Representatives voted on HR 358, which literally would allow women to die at hospitals instead of getting the emergency care they need if it included abortion care. Seriously? Read more »