But I've got to wonder about the "pro-life" movement in Ecuador (I have an Ecuadorian cousin-in-law). Abortion is illegal there. So is RU-486, which can terminate a pregnancy up to several weeks after implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterine wall. So-called morning-after pills are a somewhat different story. There are different types. Some prevent a fertilized egg from implanting. Other pills delay ovulation, i.e., they prevent fertilization from occuring in the first place. Postinor-2 is a type that apparently (it's not entirely clear) uses both mechanisms: it consists of the same kinds of hormones that are in normal birth-control pills and is known to delay ovulation; but it may also reduce the chance of implantation.
Ecuador has approved two kinds of morning-after pills that it does not consider "abortive," including Postinor-2. But now it is reconsidering.
Why are doctors and public health specialists concerned about the possible withdrawal of both kinds of emergency contraception?The ministry's sudden indecision comes after a lawsuit by pro-life lawyers in the port city of Guayaquil impeded the sale of a new type of morning-after pill and raised questions about another type previously approved for sale in Ecuador.
[snip]
Advocates of morning-after pills say they are not abortive and are therefore legal....
But that argument is not acceptable to Fernando Rosero, the leader of 18 self-described pro-life lawyers who filed the lawsuit in November, after a newspaper reported that the morning-after pill Postinor-2 had become available in Ecuador.
"We saw the headline: 'Beginning today, you can get the morning-after pill,''' he recounted, "We said, 'What?!'''
That surprise led to the lawsuit against the government, which led to a quick judge's ruling. And just like that, Postinor-2 was off the shelves in Ecuador. The government has filed an appeal.
[snip]
In 1998, as morning-after pills were hitting the market in the region, a group of doctors in public and private practice debated the issue and agreed to approve some pills that were not considered abortive the next year. The pill known worldwide as RU-486, which they considered abortive, is not legal in Ecuador.
"We are all in agreement in that we are against abortion. And we, the doctors, don't see this as abortive,'' said Dr. Monica Arellano, who works in reproductive health with various governmental and nongovernmental organizations. "These people are distorting the information,'' she said, referring to Postinor-2's opponents.
This is where I lose patience with the "pro-life" label. Americans can debate what would happen if abortion were outlawed here; would there be an upsurge (and how large) of women suffering permanent injury or dying from illegal abortions? But in the context of developing countries where abortion is already illegal, the opposition of "pro-lifers" to the availability of and education about contraception undeniably advocates for a situation in which lots of women die. To paraphrase the chickenhawk mantra, contraception opponents are objectively pro-dead women.Legislators agreed with the doctors and did not see fit to intervene. But that may change now, said a frustrated Arellano, who argues that the current debate is largely driven by the intersection of politics and religion rather than the health needs of Ecuadorean women.
Although Ecuadorean public-health authorities do not offer exact figures, they say the number of illegal abortions occurring in unsafe conditions is rising each year and is one of the leading causes of death among young women here.
"This is a public-health problem that affects the poorest and the youngest,'' Arellano said.
Call that what you want, but don't call it pro-life.
0 comments in Pro-Life?
Post a Comment