Plan B for Rape Victims
In the Hartford Courant today, Dr. Steve Fleischman (an obstetrician and gynecologist) sums up the Plan B debate thusly:
“The possibility of pregnancy is one of a victim’s greatest fears, and one that can almost certainly be alleviated by quickly providing the victim with emergency contraception. This is a solution so simple that it’s incredible, in this day and age, that we’re even debating it.”
Earlier in his piece, Dr. Fleischman explains:
Medical science defines pregnancy as beginning upon successful implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus. Therefore, an abortion can only be performed after implantation. Because emergency contraception has no effect once implantation has occurred, it is simply contraception – no more, no less.
[...]
The majority of medical, scientific and public health professionals support immediately offering emergency contraception to all rape victims who are at risk of pregnancy from the assault when they receive treatment in any hospital emergency department. Administration of a pregnancy test (not an ovulation test) can be an acceptable medical practice to determine whether the rape victim was already pregnant before the assault.
So the debate isn’t really about whether Plan B is a form of abortion, because it isn’t. That’s more of a disinformation campaign than a debate. The debate isn’t really about whether rape victims should have unobstructed access to Plan B, because healthcare professionals overwhelmingly agree that they should.
Instead, it’s turned into a debate about the rights of hospitals affiliated with the Catholic Church to deny adequate care to rape victims based on their religious doctrine. Catholics believe that life begins at conception. My understanding is they believe that at the exact moment one spermatozoa penetrates an ovum, that the hands of god add in a third thing: a soul.
Am I the only one who thinks that god’s hands could be put to much better use disposing of the rapist at that point? Mysterious ways indeed.
I think people are entitled to believe what they want. I also think that hospitals are for practicing medicine and that churches are for practicing religion. It is possible to separate your job and its responsibilities from your religious beliefs. If it isn’t, then you are unqualified to do your job.
So by your brilliant analysis anyone who believes in God is thereby incapable of performing any work. Glad to know the rest of the country doesn’t feel that way. Catholic hospitals deserve the right to practice medicine in accordance with the religious beliefs of the Catholic Church. If you don’t like that idea, don’t go to a Catholic hospital. Otherwise, by forcing Catholic hospitals and it’s employees to commit sins in the name of compassion, the government is refusing to allow us to practice our religion freely. Catholics aren’t fighting for every hospital at the moment, just ours. This is religious discrimination at its worst. I personally pray that the church will close all the Catholic hospitals to prevent the government from forcing it to commit sins. Whether the sin is abortion or contraception is irrelevant-they are both mortal and have always for 2000 years been prohibited by the church.
Opal
Opal,
I think you missed something. I wrote that (emphasis added) “[i]t is possible to separate your job and its responsibilities from your religious beliefs.”
I never concluded that “anyone who believes in God is thereby incapable of performing any work” as you wrote.
Furthermore, no one is forcing Catholic hospitals to do anything. Catholics got into the medicine business of their own volition, and as such they need to administer adequate healthcare in accordance with state and federal standards.
Last time I checked, you did not have to be Catholic (or even Christian) to be a healthcare provider, nor do you have to be Catholic to gain employment at a Catholic hospital. Surely there are some good non-Catholics working in Catholic hospitals who can fulfill the responsibilities that Catholics won’t.
Just like with the abortion issue, the point is, “If abortion or Plan B contraceptive is against your religion, then you may refuse them”. Catholics need not accept Plan B, if raped and they end up at ANY hospital. So why do non-catholics have to be held hostage to a Catholic rule in a Hospital which contracted to do business under the laws of the state?
I would be willing to bet, that there are PLENTY of Catholics who take birth control despite what their priests tell them, and I even know some Catholics who have gone for Abortions (one very religious gal had two, because to go home and tell her parents was out of the question). I think the large majority of Catholic gals who have been violated by a rape, ending up with a choice of potential pregnancy or a simple pill which, in the words of the Dr ” Because emergency contraception has no effect once implantation has occurred, it is simply contraception – no more, no less.”, would opt for the Plan B in the first 72 hrs before implanation.
Catholic hospitals deserve the right to practice medicine in accordance with the religious beliefs of the Catholic Church. If you don’t like that idea, don’t go to a Catholic hospital.
I am getting sick and tired of this anti-woman madness hidden under the cloak of religious liberty.
Women deserve the right to adequate medical care after being sexually assaulted. If you don’t like the idea that women are worthy of basic medical care, don’t run a hospital.
As a Catholic, I’d just like to point out a couple of things:
1) The issue of “ensoulment”, or whether a soul actually is part of a fertilized ovum from the time that the sperm penetrates the egg, is not even relevant to a debate about Plan B, because there is NO EVIDENCE that Plan B would even prevent implantation. There is ample evidence that suggests otherwise. The only proven effects that Plan B has are:
a) Preventing ovulation (or preventing an egg from release)
b) Preventing fertilization (or preventing the sperm from meeting the egg, which Plan B does by thickening the cervical mucous). Think sperm normally swimming in watery mucous versus sperm swimming in jello. They ain’t gettin’ nowhere in jello, thus even if an egg has been released, Plan B can stop the sperm on its way to the egg.
Dr. Fleischman is right that Plan B does not interfere wtih an already implanted egg, and thus can not cause an abortion. But I wish he had gone further to include the medical evidence that Plan B doesn’t interfere with implantation, either, because unfortunately some Catholic Church leaders are erroneously using the term “chemical abortion” to refer to anything that prevents implantation, before a pregnancy even begins. But Plan B doesn’t interfere with a fertilized egg’s implantion, either.
2) Connecticut Catholic Hospitals already commit the “sin” of dispensing contraception, so the commenter above who thinks all Catholic hospitals should close down all their good services if this bill passes should already believe that they should be closed down now.
3) Catholic hospitals in other neighboring states have no problem adhering to this medical protocol for rape victims. It hasn’t caused the Catholic hospitals to close. They simply adhere to state standards for medical care for rape victims.
4) New York’s law is almost identical to CT’s except that it allows for a pregnancy test to first determine that a woman is not pregnant, which is fine. The problem is that the CT Catholic protocol (which is NEW, not one that has been in place for a decade) requires a urine LH or ovulation test, which they falsely claim can indicate whether Plan B would cause a chemical abortion. That’s simply disinformation. And while the Church has every right to its own beliefs about ensoulment and the origins of life, it doesn’t have a right to spread false information about medical and scientific facts.
Here we go again….
If you are not Catholic and do not uphold the teachings of the Catholic church, do not go to a Catholic hospital. We do live in a free country where you have a choice. As far as
, isn’t that precisely what you are “fighting” for, to force Catholic hospitals to offer Plan B?
Anti-woman? The most anti-woman thing you can do is have an abortion! Show me where violating a woman’s body in the form of an abortion is beneficial to your health and well being? Sorry to inform you, God did indeed create you and He created you a woman, to… have babies. Why is this such an infringement on your “civil liberties”?
Forgive me if I am wrong but didn’t the manufacturer of Plan B acknowledge that the drug can indeed prevent the earliest stage of pregnancy from implantation, thereby terminating the newly created life? Why do you guys keep overlooking that fact? I guess your form of thinking goes along with the people who think that the birth control pill actually still stops ovulation.
There seems to be some controversy as to whether Plan B causes abortions. To help sort through the controversy, I offer the following two pieces of evidence that Plan B can indeed cause abortions.
Plan B’s website states the following: “Plan B may also work by preventing it (the fertilized egg) from attaching to the uterus.”
The Catholic church believes and teaches that life begins *at conception* (before implantation) and is vehemently opposed to taking innocent life at any stage of development. The manufacturer of Plan B acknowledges that the drug can indeed prevent the earliest stage of pregnancy from implantation, thereby terminating the newly created life.
Dr. Frank Davidoff, testifying before the committee and citing the latest studies said: “…while Plan B was nearly 100% effective in preventing pregnancy when it was used before ovulation occurred, it was *almost* completely ineffective in preventing pregnancy when it was used after ovulation and fertilization had occurred.” (*Emphasis added.)
It is interesting to note that Dr. Davidoff testified in favor of forcing all hospitals to provide Plan B, but even he was forced to unwittingly acknowledge that abortion is a possibility. If Plan B is “almost” ineffective in preventing a conceived child from implantation, then the point that the drug does sometimes prevent the fertilized egg from implantation is conceded.
I should also point out that Catholic hospitals already provide Plan B to the majority of these victims, when pregnancy has not already occurred – so any talk of contraception being the real issue is baseless. This issue concerns abortion and religious liberties – and how victims of rape (the woman *and* the unborn child) should be treated by religious medical institutions.
One thing should be clarified in response to other comments.
There is no medical test for fertilization. A pregnancy test is useless to determine if pregnancy has occurred before implantation. I don’t know for certain, but I assume that this is the reason why Catholic hospitals test for ovulation before administering Plan B in these cases.
Spaze, you said, “It is possible to separate your job and its responsibilities from your religious beliefs. If it isn’t, then you are unqualified to do your job.”
You do realize that this flies in the face of religious liberties, right?
How far do you want to go with this? Since abortion is a “medical procedure”, should all doctors be compelled to perform them if the need arises? If a doctor refuses, should their license be refused or revoked?
This is where your logic is leading.
While these comments have all been interesting, I think the main point has been overlooked. The way I see it, the Constitution has provided to the citizens of this country the right to formulate their own opinion and make their own decisions in regards to issues of religion. The Supreme Court has already spoken about a woman’s personal rights to maintain the control of her body (Roe v. Wade).
The point of this argument is not to try and persuade everyone else into seeing this from your religious perspective. The point is that when Catholic hospitals are funded by the government (the people), there is a Constitutional obligation for that hospital to provide the option of services that the medical establishment—not religion—deems appropriate. For a government-funded establishment to deny a woman, who has been the victim of rape, the right to medically approved treatment for religious reasons is a violation of her constitutional rights; and, for a lack of better words, a miscarriage of justice.
Those who want to manipulate and control others with their own personal beliefs should work to overturn Roe v. Wade, and repeal several aspects of the Bill of Rights—leave the rape victims alone.
“The point is that when Catholic hospitals are funded by the government (the people), there is a Constitutional obligation for that hospital to provide the option of services that the medical establishment—not religion—deems appropriate.”
That’s all well and good, except for the fact that this proposal seeks to force every hospital to provide Plan B whether or not they accept state money. If Catholic hospitals refuse state funds, they will still be compelled to provide Plan B by law.
Steve makes a valid point. Bill No. 1343 states in part:
(b) Each licensed health care facility that provides emergency treatment to victims of sexual assault including, any health care facility that is a participating provider of services under any of the state’s medical assistance programs shall:
(1) Provide each victim of sexual assault with medically and factually accurate and objective information relating to emergency contraception;
(2) Inform such victim of sexual assault of the availability of emergency contraception, its use and efficacy; and
(3) Dispense emergency contraception to such victim of sexual assault upon the request of such victim.
(c) The Commissioner of Public Health shall adopt regulations, in accordance with chapter 54 of the general statutes, to implement the provisions of this section.
I think the key word here is licensed. It is the Department of Public Health, with the assistance of the Office of Health Care Access, which provides state licenses to hospitals. A medical license issued by the State is an assurance to the public that the policies and practices of that facility are in accordance with State regulations. Those regulations are based on medically established policy—not religious doctrine. For the State of Connecticut to allow its government sanctioned hospitals to refuse medical treatment to rape victims in the name of religion is a clear violation of the fundamental rights of Americans.
Steve, out of curiosity, how many Catholic hospitals are there in Connecticut that do not receive public funding?
CGG,
“I am getting sick and tired of this anti-woman madness hidden under the cloak of religious liberty. ”
Glad that you informed that as a woman, I am anti-woman. I was completely unaware of that fact. Please. Use some intellect instead of emotion in your arguments.
Unfortunately, many Catholics do take birth control and unfortunately most Catholic hospitals do dispense birth control but that does not change the fact that the Catholic Church has always been opposed to abortion and birth control for 2000 years (this issue is not a new one). And it does not change the fact that forcing a Catholic hospital system to do something against it’s own moral code is infringement of the Bill of Rights (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof). This is prohibiting the free exercise of religion. If individual doctors do it of their own free accord, so be it. I am obviously opposed to that but neither I nor the church can legally stop them. However, forcing all doctors to offer Plan B, whether it is against their own religious beliefs is definitively preventing them from freely practicing their own religion. And please don’t come back with separation of church and state that is not in either the constitution or the bill of rights.
Spazeboy,
And as for the belief that we shouldn’t bring religion into the workplace or public sphere, I hope you realize that is impossible. If you hold onto a belief system dearly it impacts all facets of your life. I would imagine that the liberal set of values that you hold dear, colors every aspect of your life including your job, relationships, and school. Just because you may not believe in a God, or a set religion doesn’t mean that your value system doesn’t show up in the public sphere. It is just that your value system is different than mine.
I have a really good idea where you and CGG are coming from because I was there 15 years ago. I unfortunately, protested the first Iraq war, I dressed in all black with nose rings-when nobody did. I have a real solid understanding of the secular, feminist value system and I can say very clearly-it doesn’t work in the long run.
Opal