QuestionI'm not sure whether or not you can answer this or not(this is more about contraception, but is a popular argument used against freedom of choice on abortion as well). I am on Depo Provera and I have been since my late teens. Not only is it an effective and convenient method of birth control, but it has had the added benefit of putting an end to my periods(which were heavy and painful and debiliating).
My sister is the tradtional woman. She has three children already and believes it is her duty and role to have as many children as "God" decides she should have. She also never had an interest in getting an education or having a career. I think this is very sad. She on the other hand, thinks it is very sad that I have no interest in marrying or having children. LOL Anyway, she said that it is a "myth" that the invention and legalization of birth control was a "good thing" for women, because it is "unnatural". She says that putting hormones into our bodies to prevent a natural function(period, pregnancy) is actually harmful, and that it was harmful to women to encourage them to set aside becoming wives and mothers to pursue a career. Needless to say she is against abortion as well. Aside from thinking it is "murder" she thinks it is also "unnatural" because women were made biologically to desire to have and nurture children. And just like birth control abortion interferes with a natural biological function. How would you refute such an argument? And is there any actual medical/scientific evidence to back up her argument about birth control being "unnatural" and harmful to women?
Because I actually read that some doctors believe there is no medical necessity to having a period(unless you want to get pregnant) and that there are actually health benefits to NOT having one! Mabye I am "unnatural" but I do not need to bleed once a month, and have excruciating cramps to "feel like a woman" and I have NEVER desired to have children or to get married. I have a cute apartment, a career that I love, a great boyfriend, and a Great Dane. LOL That is the only "kid" I want, and I am going to stay on Depo until I am 99! I mean, sure there may be potential risks. But that is true of any drug. What about the risks associated with pregnancy and childbirth, not to talk about all the sacrifices a woman makes? To me the good definitely outweighs the potential bad. Thanks.
Pam
AnswerDear Pam,
You wrote:
"Needless to say she is against abortion as well. Aside from thinking it is "murder" she thinks it is also "unnatural" because women were made biologically to desire to have and nurture children. And just like birth control abortion interferes with a natural biological function. How would you refute such an argument?"
Abortion is almost more natural than giving birth, and here is why. In the medical community they use the term "abortion" to mean "miscarriage". They do not differentiate between spontaneous abortion
(miscarriage)and the kind of abortion you get at a doctor's office.
Women have many more miscarriages than births throughout the course of their lives. In fact, a highly regarded embryologist has testified to
The President's Council on Bioethics that sexually active women, not any any type of birth control, have an enormous amount of embryo loss:
Visit my forum at http://alldrama.bigforumpro.com/abortion-debate-f3/eiri-are-you-actually-pro-lif...
to read more of this, and also read my blog, which also discusses it:
http://wingnutwatch.typepad.com/wingnutwatch/2008/06/this-is-the-seq.html
"80% Embryo Loss
"PROF. SANDEL: [W]hat percent of fertilized eggs fail to implant or are otherwise lost?
DR. OPITZ: The answer to your first question is that it is enormous. Estimates range all the way from 60 percent to 80 percent of the very earliest stages, cleavage stages, for example, that are lost."
source
In fact, the numbers of embryos lost are so huge, they make abortion pale in comparison.
Natural procreation causes more embryo loss than abortion:
"The rate of natural embryo loss after conception in unassisted human reproduction is high, some suggest as high as 80 percent, and the fact of natural loss is fairly well known, so that persons who engage in or permit the pursuit of conception through unassisted reproduction are knowingly bringing about the conception of many embryos that will die.
Moreover, they suggest, the high rate of natural embryo loss should bring into question the views of those who believe that early-stage human embryos merit equal treatment with human children and adults. If so many die in the natural course of things, how do we not treat natural procreation as a great fountain of tragedy and carnage? They argue that the natural rate of embryo loss, and our response to it, should teach us something about the limited significance of human embryos in the earliest stages." source"
So, as you can see, the human body experiences abortion/miscarriage about 8 times for every 1 birth. Having an abortion at a doctor's office is the exact same thing as the above described embryonic loss.
Abortion is, therefor, more natural than having a baby.
Also, read this thread:
http://alldrama.bigforumpro.com/abortion-debate-f3/eiri-are-you-actually-pro-lif...
"An abortion is something that is natural to the the female body. We abort far more pregnancies and "pre-pregnancies" (fertilized eggs which have not implanted) than we ever carry to term.
There is no difference to our bodies physically between an abortion performed by a physician or one performed by our bodies. They both involve the emptying out of our uteruses (uteri?) with embryos attached."
You wrote: "And is there any actual medical/scientific evidence to back up her argument about birth control being "unnatural" and harmful to women?"
I'm not sure, I am not aware of any.
You wrote: "Because I actually read that some doctors believe there is no medical necessity to having a period(unless you want to get pregnant) and that there are actually health benefits to NOT having one!"
This is true. Women who are on a hormonal form of birth control don't actually get their period, they get withdrawal bleeding when they take their placebo pills. Ovulation triggers the uterine lining to thicken, and the pill stops ovulation. Since there is no thickening there is no need for a period.
You wrote: "What about the risks associated with pregnancy and childbirth,"
Please follow this link:
http://wingnutwatch.typepad.com/wingnutwatch/
to read this:
"Suffering and Risk in Pregnancy Often Missing in Abortion Debate".
I hope I answered all of your questions. Please write back if you have any more.
Take care,
Deb
