I’ve always said that the use of contraception leads to abortion.
Foremost Expert on Contraception Says the Pill is Not Working – It’s “Outdated”
By Hilary White
LONDON, July 4, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Pill is outdated and results in unplanned pregnancies; women should get hormonal implants or intra-uterine devices (IUD) instead, says a leading contraception expert in the US. Women do not take the Pill consistently says Professor James Trussell, and it ends up causing more unplanned pregnancies. But rather than encouraging people not to have promiscuous sex or to use Natural Family Planning, what is really needed is a method of contraception that can be forgotten but will still be foolproof, he indicated.
Trussell’s statements backed up the observations of those who work in crisis pregnancy centres who say that, despite the government’s insistence on more “contraceptive education,” a large number of unplanned pregnancies happen while women are on the Pill.
Trussell is the director of the Office of Population Research at Princeton University and was speaking in London at the conference of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, Britain’s largest abortion-promoting organisation. He said that in the US, a quarter of all pregnancies are “unwanted” and a result of failed contraception. The Daily Telegraph coverage notes that half of unplanned pregnancies in Britain end in abortion.
The morning after pill, or “emergency contraception,” that in some cases causes an early term abortion, is also not the solution, he said. The real problem is that there is too much “unprotected” sex going on.
“It is not reduced unintended pregnancies in America or anywhere else that has introduced it. There is so much unprotected sex you would have to use so much emergency contraception to make a dent,” he said.
The answer, he says, is more and better contraceptives.
“The Pill is an outdated method because it does not work well enough. It is very difficult for ordinary women to take a pill every single day. The beauty of the implant or the IUD is that you can forget about them.”
An IUD is a device that is inserted by a doctor into the uterus that prevents the implantation of an already formed embryo in the uterine wall, and as such is an abortifacient device by definition, and not contraception. In 2001, Britain’s Society for the Protection of Unborn Children forced the BBC to change its news coverage and admit that the IUD is not a form of contraception.
But such distinctions are immaterial to Trussell, whose determined advocacy of contraception is not a surprise given his associations with some of the largest abortion advocacy organisations in the world.
In addition to his position at Princeton, Trussell is a senior fellow at the Guttmacher Institute, the research branch of Planned Parenthood, is a member of the board of directors of the NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, the Society of Family Planning, and the National Medical Committee of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. He serves on the editorial advisory committees of Contraception and Contraceptive Technology Update.
- Source: LifeSiteNews.com
He says there’s too much “unprotected sex” going on. Uh… what exactly are we protecting against? I mean, the term “protected sex” is to protect people against sexually transmitted diseases, right? Does he mean that people have to be protected against pregnancies? That is to say, are pregnancies harmful?
I think the best advice I’ve heard so far is: “If you’re not ready for babies, don’t have sexual intercourse when you’re fertile.” That’s the basis of NFP, actually. Wouldn’t this bit of common sense be better than coming up with more contraceptives? But oh yeah, I forgot, contraceptives are big money.
Filed under: Abortion, Contraception, Culture of Death, Natural Family Planning, News, Sex
But rather than encouraging people not to have promiscuous sex or to use Natural Family Planning
Sensible:
1. People get pregnant whether or not they’re having “promiscuous” sex.
2. “Natural Family Planning” *can* work – but (according to all the women I know who use it successfully) if and only if the man completely surrenders all decisions on whether or not the couple will have heterosexual intercourse to the woman.
A woman who can’t be sure her male partner will always let her be the one to initiate sex, needs to use some more reliable form of contraception.
Consistently and reliably used, contraception prevents abortions: unlike the pro-abortion pharmacies and their supporters that discourage women from using oral contraceptives consistently and reliably.
That is to say, are pregnancies harmful?
Yes. In 2004, the U.S. maternal mortality rate was 13 deaths per 100,000 live births. A total of 540 women were reported to have died of maternal causes in 2004, 45 more than were reported in 2003.
Maternal morbidity (permanent/long-term damage to a woman’s health due to pregnancy) is far more common – even in the developed world, about 1 in every 100 pregnancies will result in maternal morbidity.
I think the best advice I’ve heard so far is: “If you’re not ready for babies, don’t have sexual intercourse when you’re fertile.”
It’s the “advice” that leads to the highest abortion rates, as it leads to the highest rate of unwanted pregnancy. If you think high abortion rates are good, well, I guess this is good advice.
I think it’s better to have lower abortion rates by ensuring that both women and men have free access to and accurate information about contraception. I’m all for preventing unwanted pregnancy, rather than ensuring women have to have abortions to terminate unwanted pregnancies.
Hi jesurgislac,
Thanks for your comments.
It is not true that the man has to surrender all decisions to the woman, because it is always encouraged for the man to assist the woman in charting her fertility cycle. That way, the burden of fertility control can be shared by both parties, and not borne by one party alone.
However, the objections you have to NFP do not criticize the method at all. They simply point out certain parts of the couple relationship that need to be worked on. The method itself works well, better than all contraceptives actually, while sharing an equal success rate as the Pill.
It has been shown (in the article, as well as other studies) that a quarter of all pregnancies are “unwanted” and a result of failed contraception. In Britain, the proportion is half. This shows us that contraception is not as reliable as NFP in postponing pregnancies. And it has been shown that the Pill is not safe as it puts the woman in greater risk of diseases.
This is the accurate information about contraceptives that you are looking for.
In addition, through proper practice and usage of NFP, no child will be left unwanted as the mentality and attitude that NFP promotes is one of generosity towards life (unless NFP is used as a contraceptive), whereas the mentality promoted by the use of contraception is one that rejects life.
In truth, you will find that those who promote the use of contraceptives are also the ones who promote the use of abortion (e.g. Planned Parenthood), whereas those that discourage women from using contraceptives also discourage women from having abortions. It’s about respect for life.
I want to point out something you missed out in your statistics when deciding whether pregnancies are harmful or not:
For every 100,000 live births, there are 13 mothers who die. BUt you are neglecting the 999,987 new lives that are brought into the world. Even in the developing world, for every 1 mother who dies during childbirth, there are 99 new lives that are brought into the world.
God bless,
Catholic Writer