Question about BC methods... Fundies?

[VeraAnne]

Like men are going to line up for that shot! I can't tell you how many women I've known who've had a tubal ligation because the man wouldn't get a vasectomy. Never mind that tubal ligation involves far more risk than a vasectomy.

I don't know. I think the whole "I can have sex without the risk of getting anyone knocked up, and then I can reverse it when I'm ready for kids" thing is a pretty strong incentive.

Plus, it's just a shot. A scary shot, I will admit, but still a shot. No cutting involved.

My husband plans on getting a vasectomy, but he'd do this instead if it's out there when the time comes.

It really does piss me off about the tubal ligation. Not only is the surgery itself more risky, but if pregnancy does occur it is ectopic 50% of the time. No thanks!

[dawbs]

I don't know. I think the whole "I can have sex without the risk of getting anyone knocked up, and then I can reverse it when I'm ready for kids" thing is a pretty strong incentive.

Plus, it's just a shot. A scary shot, I will admit, but still a shot. No cutting involved.

My husband plans on getting a vasectomy, but he'd do this instead if it's out there when the time comes.

It really does piss me off about the tubal ligation. Not only is the surgery itself more risky, but if pregnancy does occur it is ectopic 50% of the time. No thanks!

I think "oh, men wont' do that" is, from my reading, VERY generational.

Kids used to be a way of proving one's virility.

Now, since dads are expected to parent and pay for kids they have, it's acceptable.

I can't even count the number of single guys I know who would love a affordable way to be sure that they can't have an 'oopsy' baby

[Guest Anonymous]

I think doctors should be required to tell women that the pill isn't guaranteed to *not* make them fart rainbows. All of the available evidence suggests that it won't, but they can't absolutely prove that it will never happen. We need to start a movement for informed rainbow fart consent.

On a serious note, requiring doctors to tell women that the pill *might* prevent implantation when there is no real reason to think that it does comes across as trying to scare women out of taking birth control. You can't prove a negative, for fuck's sake. Lots of medications *might* do something but if there's no reason to think that they do, why faff about with it?

[emmiedahl]

I would take my teenaged son in for that shot. It is hard with boys; you can give them condoms and stash emergency birth control under the sink in case a lady friend needs it, but there are no guarantees. With a girl, you can go in and get her a Depo shot. Condoms are still necessary, but I like to double up on contraception when it comes to teenagers, having been a teen mom myself.

[VeraAnne]

requiring doctors to tell women that the pill *might* prevent implantation when there is no real reason to think that it does comes across as trying to scare women out of taking birth control. You can't prove a negative, for fuck's sake. Lots of medications *might* do something but if there's no reason to think that they do, why faff about with it?

Because we do know that it happens, you just can't say if it acted in such a way in any given month without extensive testing. We know that the pill does not always prevent ovulation, and we know that the pill does change the lining of the uterus. We also know that breakthrough ovulation happens more often with POPs than combination pills. Thus, it is safe to say that if break through ovulation does occur, the changes in uterine lining will act as a method of birth control. There's nothing controversial there.

I guess a woman could come in month to month to have her endometrial lining checked for thickness, but it makes far more sense to just explain to her the way the pill works and let her make her own decision about if those risks are acceptable to her.

[Guest Anonymous]

Because we do know that it happens, you just can't say if it acted in such a way in any given month without extensive testing. We know that the pill does not always prevent ovulation, and we know that the pill does change the lining of the uterus. We also know that breakthrough ovulation happens more often with POPs than combination pills. Thus, it is safe to say that if break through ovulation does occur, the changes in uterine lining will act as a method of birth control. There's nothing controversial there.

I guess a woman could come in month to month to have her endometrial lining checked for thickness, but it makes far more sense to just explain to her the way the pill works and let her make her own decision about if those risks are acceptable to her.

Did you bother to read what Doc Sharon wrote? Because she addressed and debunked all of that.

[VeraAnne]

Yeah, I'm really excited about the male birthcontrol on the horizon. It takes so many ethical issues away because it is acting on the sperm, not the woman's anatomy.

Of course, it does introduce some new considerations about men being in charge of birth control instead of women, but in my mind that is easily worked out because women can continue to take whatever measures they feel comfortable with in addition to whatever the man does.

Obviously the QF movement isn't going to embrace this, but mainstream Christians and the secular world will be very well served by something that doesn't require daily upkeep, has few side effects, and is reversable. Really, it's what researchers have been after for a long time. If it becomes something that is widely used, perhaps even just a regular part of childhood shots, we could almost eliminate unplanned pregnancies.

Sorry, getting ahead of myself a little here, but I am obviously really excited about it!

[Kitty]

I'm excited too! Even if my bf got this shot, I'd still stay on the NuvaRing, but now we wouldn't have to worry about "doubling up." Because we don't like condoms that much.

[VeraAnne]

Did you bother to read what Doc Sharon wrote? Because she addressed and debunked all of that.

Yes, but I also read many other doctors who disagree with her based on evidence and studies.

[Austin]

Did you bother to read what Doc Sharon wrote? Because she addressed and debunked all of that.

Nah, she doesn't want to mess up her neat little construct with facts. Even in her own cited article, the authors concede that many of their medical professional colleagues disagree with them unless the event is either definitely proven to exist or proven to be a common event.

My doctor is not obligated to tell me every single little thing that could happen. Life is just not that predictable. Side effects that have actually been observed, such as the authors' examples of occasional death with anesthesia, yes. Things that could happen if Mars is in the house of Mercury or whatever-the-hell, no. Nearly every prescription medication has a long list of possible side effects that doctors do not discuss with patients because #1) they consider it very, very unlikely, and #2) they don't have four hours to spend with every patient.

The reason that I have been prescribed oral contraceptives because my doctor never wants me to ovulate again, given my extensive use of fertility drugs in my youth and the risk associated with ovarian cancer. So oral contraceptives have been prescribed to me precisely because it prevents ovulation.

ETA: this issue is completely useless to me, b/c I do not believe that a fertilized egg is a person. What fries me about it is the constant stream of misinformation spewed out by anti-choicers to women who don't know any better about why a statistically very effective form of birth control is actually "abortion" :roll:

[dairyfreelife]

I want to know what the Duggars would do if one of their daughters got diagnosed with a condition like PCOS or endometriosis where the standard medical treatment is the birth control pill. My guess is that they would make their daughters pray the cramps away and disregard the long-term health risks of not treating these conditions.

My OB/GYN believes I have endo due to my symptoms. I may just have some odd condition that looks like endo though. BC pills are used for endometriosis to ease the symptoms and help prevent it from spreading. There is no other easy fix for it except invasive procedures involving hormone therapy or hysterectomy. I don't know much about PCOS.

I feel sorry for young fundie girls whose parents won't allow them to take the pill to help. The pill has been a life saver. I can actually function now when I could not before. I wonder how these girls, if they had my condition, how they could run a household like they are supposed to? I know that before bc, I could not do anything except lie in misery and try to find any way possible to stop the pains. For me, no amount of pain pills, heat, exercises or hot teas helped my cramps. Hopefully such young ladies can find relief in those methods though.

[Austin]

Every time I see this poster's username, I can't help but think of the movie, Vera Drake. I highly recommend the movie. Everything is not so neatly black and white and one person's "murder" is another person's "compassion".

http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Vera_ ... id=2361637

[VeraAnne]

So oral contraceptives have been prescribed to me precisely because it prevents ovulation.

It doesn't prevent ovulation 100% of the time. Some methods are better at ovulation suppression than others, but all carry a risk of breakthrough ovulation.

[Austin]

It doesn't prevent ovulation 100% of the time. Some methods are better at ovulation suppression than others, but all carry a risk of breakthrough ovulation.

Yeah, I'm sure you know more than my doctor. I'll pass along your concerns :roll:

[VeraAnne]

I'm sorry to hear about your endometriosis, Dairyfree. I know that laproscopic surgery can help some women, but it only tames what is already there, it doesn't keep things from coming back.

I have it as well. There was a time when they said that childbirth and nursing helped the condition, but in my experience it just sets it back during the time that I'm nursing. Once I stop nursing, it comes raging back.

I might have ablation done after I'm done having kids, but obviously that's not a solution for young women who are still hoping to have children.

If my daughter gets it, we'll do whatever she needs to be pain free.

[VeraAnne]

Yeah, I'm sure you know more than my doctor. I'll pass along your concerns

It's not some secret hidden information. Even with perfect use, women get pregnant while on the Pill. How exactly do you think this happens if the pill is stopping ovulation 100% of the time? I'm not saying that the pill never stops ovulation, or even that it doesn't usually stop ovulation. I'm saying that it doesn't always stop ovulation, and that conclusion is based on 40 years of available research. This is a really stupid point to argue. It's like arguing if water is wet.

[Austin]

It's not some secret hidden information. Even with perfect use, women get pregnant while on the Pill. How exactly do you think this happens if the pill is stopping ovulation 100% of the time? I'm not saying that the pill never stops ovulation, or even that it doesn't usually stop ovulation. I'm saying that it doesn't always stop ovulation, and that conclusion is based on 40 years of available research. This is a really stupid point to argue. It's like arguing if water is wet.

And if the pill causes abortion, how on earth do those women get (and stay) pregnant? :shock:

[VeraAnne]

And if the pill causes abortion, how on earth do those women get pregnant?

Just as the pill does not prevent ovulation in all cases, it also doesn't alter the uterine lining significantly in all cases. If both things don't work out, you get pregnant. If the ovulation supression fails, but the uterine lining is too low, you'll conceive but the embryo won't implant.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Did you read what Lissar posted from DocSharon, an OB/GYN and a practicing Catholic regarding your assertion about oral contraception and the morning after pill?

edited for clarity

My OB explained that LAM works on a "population" basis, but isn't reliable for individuals. In other words - if everyone does ecological breastfeeding, on average you would see a dramatic reduction in conceptions prior to 6 months post-partum. On an individual level, though, a woman can ovulate 2 weeks before her period, so she can be fertile without realizing it. Since there is enormous individual variation in the time that it takes fertility to return, you can't count on LAM if you really don't want to conceive.

For me personally - it took 9-12 months for my period to return when I was breastfeeding. However, once that happened I was definitely fertile, and twice conceived while breastfeeding.

[ilovetchotchkes]

And if the pill causes abortion, how on earth do those women get (and stay) pregnant? :shock:

I know someone who got pg on the pill, twice, AND they were using condoms. She had a tubal after baby #2 and her husband also got snipped.

[Angri-la]

*I will not engage the Anti-Choice people who won't listen to reason.

edited because I was trying to be all logical with VeraAnne.

[VeraAnne]

*I will not engage the Anti-Choice people who won't listen to reason.

edited because I was trying to be all logical with VeraAnne.

Where have I said anything illogical in this thread? All of my positions are based on logic and reason. In fact, logic and reason are the only things that have any sway over me in this debate.

[FlorenceHamilton]

Ok. My turn. Medical answer about the pill. The pill does suppress ovulation, but it is not 100%. It also makes the uterine lining not good for implantation. Putting a young woman with PCO on hormonal contraception actually preserves their fertility. The process of ovulation involves the formation of a follicular cyst. This occurs every cycle and in normal cases leads to ovulation. It is perfectly normal and healthy for a woman to have several follicular cysts forming during the first part of her cycle. Eventually, one (sometimes more than one) follicle extrudes an ovum (egg) into the fallopian tube. This is what we call "ovulation". After the ovum leaves the follicular cyst, is seals over and under hormonal control begins to secrete progesterone. It then becomes a luteal cyst. If the ovum is not fertilized and implanted, the luteal cyst will shrival up and the process begins again.

Normal, healthy women form cysts on their ovaries in this cyclical fashion every month. In women with PCO, the hormonal sequencing is not as it should be. Cysts form in a more haphazard fashion and often so not extrude an ovum (do not ovulate). The follicular cyst just grow and grow without popping the egg out. So they get too big and leak, sometimes even bleed. This leakage causes pain because it causes a sterile pertitonitis. In other words, it hurts as bad as appendicitis. Not only that, but it results in scarring and damage to the ovaries. Over time, there is not effective way for an ovum to be released from these damaged ovaries. By inhibiting the follicular cysts from even forming with hormonal contraception, the ovaries do not become damaged by years of malfunctioning. this way, when she is ready to conceive, sometimes with hormonal help, the eggs have healthy tissue to emerge from.

Lots of ova never get fertilized. Lots of fertilized ova never implant, even in nature...probably 60%. Pregnancy begins at implantation. The fertilized egg is just a ball of cells. No differentiation occurs until after implantation.

I can see (although I do not agree) that some people can feel that the implanted embryo is a potential person and must be protected by law. I cannot see how a free floating zygote is a human being at all.

In any case, hormonal contraception is no more a chemical abortion than a case of a sexual encounter during a woman's fertile period that does not result in pregnancy is a spiritual abortion.

(edited for spelling)

[Austin]

Ok. My turn. Medical answer about the pill. The pill does suppress ovulation, but it is not 100%. It also makes the uterine lining not good for implantation. Putting a young woman with PCO on hormonal contraception actually preserves their fertility. The process of ovulation involves the formation of a follicular cyst. This occurs every cycle and in normal cases leads to ovulation. It is perfectly normal and healthy for a woman to have several follicular cysts forming during the first part of her cycle. Eventually, one (sometimes more than one) follicle extrudes an ovum (egg) inot the fallopian tube. This is what we call "ovulation". After the ovum leaves the follicular cyst, is seals over and under hormonal control begins to secrete progesterone. It then becomes a luteal cyst. If the ovum is not fertilized and implanted, the luteal cyst will shrival up and the process begins again.

Normal, healthy woman form cysts on their ovaries in this cyclical fashion every month. In women with PCO, the hormonal sequencing is not as it should be. Cysts form in a more haphazard fashion and often so not extrude an ovum (do not ovulate). The follicular cyst just grow and grow without popping the egg out. So they get too big and leak, sometimes even bleed. This leakage causes pain because it causes a sterile pertitonitis. In other words, it hurts as bad as appendicitis. Not only that, but it results in scarring and damage to the ovaries. Over time, there is not effective way for an ovum to be released from these damaged ovaries. By inhibiting the follicular cysts from even forming with hormonal contraception, the ovaries do not become damaged by years of malfunctioning. this way, when she is ready to conceive, sometimes with hormonal help, the eggs have healthy tissue to emerge from.

Lots of ova never get fertilized. Lot's of fertilized ova never implant, even in nature...probably 60%. Pregnancy begins at implantation. THe fertilized egg is just a ball of cells. No differentiation occurs until after implantation.

I can see (although I do not agree) that some people can feel that the implanted embryo is a potential person and must be protected by law. I cannot see how a free floating zygote is a human being at all.

In any case, hormonal contraception is no more a chemical abortion than a case of a sexual encounter during a woman's fertile period that does not result in pregnancy is a spiritual abortion.

That is perfect. Can I co-opt that?

[ilovetchotchkes]

Ok. My turn. Medical answer about the pill. The pill does suppress ovulation, but it is not 100%. It also makes the uterine lining not good for implantation. Putting a young woman with PCO on hormonal contraception actually preserves their fertility. The process of ovulation involves the formation of a follicular cyst. This occurs every cycle and in normal cases leads to ovulation. It is perfectly normal and healthy for a woman to have several follicular cysts forming during the first part of her cycle. Eventually, one (sometimes more than one) follicle extrudes an ovum (egg) inot the fallopian tube. This is what we call "ovulation". After the ovum leaves the follicular cyst, is seals over and under hormonal control begins to secrete progesterone. It then becomes a luteal cyst. If the ovum is not fertilized and implanted, the luteal cyst will shrival up and the process begins again.

Normal, healthy woman form cysts on their ovaries in this cyclical fashion every month. In women with PCO, the hormonal sequencing is not as it should be. Cysts form in a more haphazard fashion and often so not extrude an ovum (do not ovulate). The follicular cyst just grow and grow without popping the egg out. So they get too big and leak, sometimes even bleed. This leakage causes pain because it causes a sterile pertitonitis. In other words, it hurts as bad as appendicitis. Not only that, but it results in scarring and damage to the ovaries. Over time, there is not effective way for an ovum to be released from these damaged ovaries. By inhibiting the follicular cysts from even forming with hormonal contraception, the ovaries do not become damaged by years of malfunctioning. this way, when she is ready to conceive, sometimes with hormonal help, the eggs have healthy tissue to emerge from.

Lots of ova never get fertilized. Lot's of fertilized ova never implant, even in nature...probably 60%. Pregnancy begins at implantation. THe fertilized egg is just a ball of cells. No differentiation occurs until after implantation.

I can see (although I do not agree) that some people can feel that the implanted embryo is a potential person and must be protected by law. I cannot see how a free floating zygote is a human being at all.

In any case, hormonal contraception is no more a chemical abortion than a case of a sexual encounter during a woman's fertile period that does not result in pregnancy is a spiritual abortion.

So if I have pcos (its a slight possibility as when we did my initial us for my son I had tons of pcos like cysts but no other symptoms aside from painful periods) the fact that I was on bc for 10+ years helped me have a baby? Backwards AND nifty!