Emergency Contraceptives

Emergency contraception should be seen as a respectful pregnancy prevention method rather than just a “morning after pill” for promiscuous women. It has been an available healthcare option for a number of years and has prevented countless abortions. Many couples, teenagers and young adults approve of emergency contraception. However, other categories of people such as parents of teenagers and members of the Catholic Church remain unconvinced that this health-care option is actually beneficial. It is this group of people who must know that emergency contraception is a valued discovery that has saved many lives. The impression society has on emergency contraception should not be sceptical. This is for the reason that emergency contraception is a better alternative than abortion. Secondly, it supports and promotes women 's rights. As a final argument, it benefits families, orphanage houses, the government and countless others. Emergency contraceptives (often called EC’s) are often categorized with dangerous methods used for terminating a pregnancy, such as a medical abortion. However, emergency contraceptives are a much better alternative than abortion. This is for three distinct reasons. Firstly, EC’s do not kill the life of a fetus, but avert the beginning of the fetus’ life. Secondly, they are more affordable and reduce the risk of future financial issues. Lastly, emergency contraceptives do not damage a woman physically and emotionally the way abortion does. To begin with, the misconception of EC’s being abortion medication is incorrect; they are birth control pills taken after intercourse and before the fertilized egg becomes implanted into the woman’s uterus (Pancham and Dunn). Unlike abortions, EC’s do not end pregnancies, but they avoid and prevent pregnancies altogether. This is one of the many reasons why emergency contraception should be viewed respectfully. They stop pregnancies from happening without killing a form of life. Besides that reason, EC’s are more affordable than abortions and reduce

the risk of future financial issues. The average cost in the year 2001 for an abortion done in Canada was about $618.46, and this does not include any health-care that was needed after the procedure (Amesa and Norman). Plan B, a well-known emergency contraceptive pill cost $45.95 US. This justifies that abortions can be extremely costly because recovery health-care postprocedure can add to a woman’s expenses. Post-procedure, the patient will need to see a doctor, more specifically, a gynecologist, and she will have to pay for any recovery surgeries and medications. Finally, EC’s do not damage a woman physically and emotionally the way abortion does. The side effects of EC’s are incomparable to the emotional and physical damage that may be caused by an abortion. Known common side effects of EC’s include: dizziness, vomiting, nausea and tiredness. The side effects for abortion can range from internal bleeding to infertility (Dunn and Guilbert). Furthermore, the side effects for emergency contraceptives are short term whereas the side effects of abortion are long-term and permanent. Moreover, an abortion can ruin a woman emotionally. Unintended pregnancies and abortions have significant emotional, social and economic consequences (Pancham and Dunn). The feeling of murder and guilt can overwhelm patients of abortion. The sorting of abortion with EC’s is incorrect, and the image portrayed by EC’s should be positive. The sale and use of emergency contraceptives supports and promotes women’s rights. The acceptance of the use of this health-care option also promotes women’s rights. However, it is a rejected alternative by certain members of Christianity and the parents of teenagers. Their opinion regarding EC’s should change because this health-care option gives women control over the time they choose to have children, and how many children they would like to have. In addition, EC’s provide a way for rape victims to keep the right to their own body. Furthermore, emergency contraception allows a woman to continue her normal life, education and work

should anything happen to her. To start, the choice of engaging in sexual activity and procreating is a woman’s decision (Wynn, Erdman, Foster and Trussell). Women have the right to plan when they want to procreate, and EC’s allow them to postpone pregnancy. Therefore, EC’s support this right entitled to any woman. Next, victims of rape will no longer have to live with unplanned children, if they consume the emergency contraceptive within the allotted interval of time before implantation. This promotes women’s rights because they will not have to feel like they have lost ownership of their own bodies. EC’s allow women to have the right over their own bodies and it will give rape victims a sense of relief, peace and safety. Lastly, emergency contraception allows a woman to continue her normal life, education and work should anything happen to her. If a woman decides to engage in sexual activity, and an unintended pregnancy occurs, EC’s would prevent the implantation in her reproductive system. This would let that woman finish her education/ job and continue a normal life uninterrupted by a child, until she is ready to begin a family. This supports a woman’s right to have and finish an education, have a job and sustain her life normally. In the perspective of an adult of member of a church, promoting and supporting women’s rights is positive. In conclusion, the impression that emergency contraceptives gives off is beneficial and respectful. That is the way it should be seen by even the doubtful mothers and fathers of teenagers, to the store clerks selling this health-care option. As a final argument, emergency contraception benefits families, orphanage houses, the government and countless others. Giving women this medication not only benefits them and their future, but it benefits their spouses, their parents and other related groups of people. Firstly, emergency contraceptives should be seen as a beneficial medication because it lessens the number of homeless people there are living on the street. This will reduce the burden a society will have because of unplanned children. Secondly, EC’s benefit hundreds of families. This is

because by being available to women, they benefit the spouse that women may be together with. Lastly, this health benefit will benefit the government financially. To start, EC’s should be seen as beneficial medication because it prevents unintended children, therefore reducing the number of homeless children on the street. This will reduce the burden a society will have because of unplanned children. This is because the more unwanted pregnancies that are prevented, the fewer children there will be on the street. The fewer children living on the street, the smaller the burden a society has to carry by providing fewer children with food and temporary shelter. A Canadian study done in 2005 revealed that there were about 97, 254 abortions performed nationwide, most of which could have been prevented if they used an emergency contraceptive (Amesa and Norman). A possible reason for not using emergency contraception could be the embarrassment women would face purchasing a medication such as Plan B. This embarrassment would be because emergency contraception is looked down upon. By not looking down on this health benefit, women will be able to purchase EC’s without facing embarrassment. This will lead to the decreasing number of abortions performed, and eventually women will not have to even think about having unplanned children who might end up on the street. Secondly, EC’s benefit hundreds of families. This is because by being available to women, they benefit the spouse that women may be together with. These couples may decide together that they want to postpone the beginning of their own family. This allows these couples to earn a steady income first and set a proper financial foundation for themselves. The prevention of pregnancy will give couples more time to plan their future. Finally, emergency contraception benefits tax payers and the government. This is because the government gives a monthly allowance to single moms with unintended pregnancies. By limiting the number of unintended pregnancies by a drastic amount, the government will not have to send single moms a monthly allowance. This will benefit tax

payers because they will not have to pull out a fraction of their income to cover the money given to single moms. This should also add to the impression our sceptical groups have of emergency contraception. In conclusion, emergency contraception should be seen as a respectful pregnancy prevention method. It has been an available health-care option for a number of years and has prevented countless abortions. While many approve of this health benefit, many remain doubtful of its benefits. The impression society has on emergency contraception should not be sceptical because EC’s are a better alternative than abortion. Secondly, it supports and promotes women 's rights. Lastly, it benefits families, orphanage houses, the government and countless others. The opinion set by the doubtful should change, because the rising generations will be even fonder of this option than the present generations.

Works Cited Adams, Noah. “Commentary: Contraceptive Equality.” All Things Considered (NPR) (n.d.): Canadian Reference Centre. Web 19 Mar. 2013 Medoff, Marshall. “The Social Science Journal Volume: 45 Issue: 1.” (2008-01-01) p. 156-172. ISSN: 0362-3319 Web. 19 Mar. 2013 Pancham, Anna and Dunn, Sheila. “Emergency Contraception In Canada: An Overview And Recent Developments.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 16.3/4 (2007): 129-133. Canadian Reference Centre. Web. 19 Mar. 2013 S. Dunn et al. “International Journal Of Gynecology and Obstetrics.” 120 (2013) 102-107 Canadian Reference Centre. Web. 19 Mar. 2013

Cited: Adams, Noah. “Commentary: Contraceptive Equality.” All Things Considered (NPR) (n.d.): Canadian Reference Centre. Web 19 Mar. 2013 Medoff, Marshall. “The Social Science Journal Volume: 45 Issue: 1.” (2008-01-01) p. 156-172. ISSN: 0362-3319 Web. 19 Mar. 2013 Pancham, Anna and Dunn, Sheila. “Emergency Contraception In Canada: An Overview And Recent Developments.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 16.3/4 (2007): 129-133. Canadian Reference Centre. Web. 19 Mar. 2013 S. Dunn et al. “International Journal Of Gynecology and Obstetrics.” 120 (2013) 102-107 Canadian Reference Centre. Web. 19 Mar. 2013