Breeze Perspectives: Time for Plan B truth
Setting the record straight on emergency contraception
By Jessica Novak, contributing writer
Posted on September 7, 2006

Societal hot button issues such as stem cell research and the controversy over the right to an abortion have and will continue to present difficult choices and decisions for both those in power and those dealing with the repercussions of the issues directly or indirectly. However emotionally charged these societal dilemmas become, it remains essential to step back from the heated debate and at the very least consider taking into account the bare facts as they stand. In the case of the controversy over the recent decision to make Plan B, commonly referred to as the “morning-after” pill, available to women 18 and over without a prescription, emotions and moral judgments are difficult to ignore and repress. Yet, without doing so, some of the most important facts concerning the issue are misunderstood or missed entirely.

First, the absolute distinction between Plan B and an abortion or the so-called abortion pill, RU-486, must be made clear. Plan B can reduce the chance of pregnancy by nearly 89 percent by preventing fertilization through a variety of hormone alterations, thickening in mucus lining the uterus, and by interfering with sperm and egg transportation. The pill is designed to be taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, though the sooner it is taken, the more effective it will be. However, if the female is pregnant before the pill is taken, it has no effect. It prevents pregnancy, but absolutely does not destroy a fertilized egg as the abortion pill is designed to do.

However, this misconception of Plan B as an abortion tool is only one facet of the moral dilemma the issue presents. Others fear the easy access will somehow increase teen promiscuity through the logic that if the “safety net” is available, young women will be more prone to use it and more prone to making dangerous decisions such as having unprotected sex.

Though this view is easily understood, it is not justified. In a recent study performed by Dr. Tina Raine of the obstetrics and gynecology department at the University of California and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, no proof of connection was found. The study, which included 2,000 women, aged 15 to 24, showed no correlation between availability of the pill and sexual behavior, unprotected sex or the transmission of sexual diseases. While emergency contraceptives being more readily available may seem to be incentive to be less cautious, I believe it is ignorant and somewhat insulting to assume women are incapable of making intelligent decisions concerning contraceptives, without taking into account extenuating circumstances such as rape victims or broken condoms.

For all those non-believers still out there, I also found some interesting numbers throughout my research that perhaps will inspire a little faith in the pill. Did you know out of all pregnancies in the United States alone, half are unintentional? Would you believe each year there are over 3 million unintended pregnancies and half result in abortion? Even 15 percent of women who regularly practice safe sex through condom use will become pregnant and 8 percent of those using oral contraceptives will as well. Yet, of all these unintended pregnancies, 50 percent could be prevented with the help of Plan B.

Thus, we have a moral dilemma. If Plan B is not the same as an abortion and therefore can and most likely will help to reduce both unintended pregnancies and abortions, why is it not encouraged? Why has the government and various groups such as the Food and Drug Administration been sitting on this decision for three years? Though the moral questions stand in many skeptical minds, the scientific facts should be considered. While women have been contemplating killing an innocent life within themselves because of a poor decision, politicians have been arguing about whether or not teen promiscuity will be affected. Not to say teen promiscuity is unimportant or not an issue — it certainly is — but it is unfair to connect teen sexuality and the availability of a pill that could potentially save lives and help reduce abortions.

A final point is this: whether or not the pill is available over the counter or through a physician, people — and teens especially — will be sexually active. Many will make intelligent decisions and take the proper steps to be as safe as possible. However, not everyone will and not everyone will all the time. The pill will not change most people’s sexual habits, but it will enable young women the slight comfort in knowing, if something happens, help is available, even if their physician is not. This advancement for women is liberating and powerful. The freedom to know there are options is the most important freedom there is. Education is the most powerful protection. Knowing the facts and how to use that knowledge is the greatest advancement for all of us.

Jessica Novak is a sophomore communications major.