TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 9 °C Wednesday 22 May, 2013

Column: Making emergency contraception easy to access has been good for women

Just over one year ago the rules for getting the morning-after pill in Ireland were relaxed. Alison Begas looks at what this change has meant for women.

Alison Begas

EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION WAS licensed for use in Ireland for the first time in 2001.  At the time, women seeking to use this medication were required to attend their GP or family planning clinic for a consultation, after which a prescription would be issued.

In spring 2011, a change in licensing regulations cleared the ground for women to access one form of emergency contraception called NorLevo, commonly known as the morning after pill,  over the counter from their community pharmacy. What did this change mean?

Did the sky fall in on our heads? No.

Did social breakdown ensue? Was there a dramatic erosion of morality? No.

How about an increase in the numbers of predatory females having multiple unprotected sexual encounters? Again, No.

There’s no evidence whatsoever that easier availability of emergency  contraception leads to increased promiscuity – for those who still use that term – or an increase in prevalence rates of sexually-transmitted infections (STIs).

As far as social breakdown and moral bankruptcy are concerned, we can still look to the Celtic Tiger political culture, the failed regulators and the bankers for that.

Instead, women were, for the first time, able to easily access emergency contraception. Many of these women were already using a routine form of contraception but might have forgotten to take their pill at the appropriate time; others experienced contraceptive failure (such as a condom splitting), while a smaller proportion might simply not have planned to have sex with their partner and got carried away in the moment.

In other words, in seeking emergency contraception they were, and are, doing the personally and socially responsible thing in wanting to avoid a crisis pregnancy.

“She travelled for 6 hours to get to Dublin to get emergency contraception”

Up until spring 2011, Well Woman’s city centre clinic in Dublin opened on Sundays to provide a walk-in emergency contraception service. Over the eight years in which this service operated, we recorded visits by women from literally all corners of the country, with many travelling from as far afield as Kerry, Cavan and Mayo. Once, memorably, a young woman boarded a bus in Donegal and, after travelling for 6 hours to get to Dublin, told us that two local GPs had refused to prescribe emergency contraception for her on grounds of ‘conscientious objection’.

One can only imagine the sense of humiliation she felt when local doctors rejected her request. Not to mention her growing sense of panic as she made her way to Dublin and the clock continued to tick; you see, the emergency contraceptive pill available at the time (the version now available over-the-counter in pharmacies) is most effective if taken in the first 24 hours after sex – when it has around 95 per cent effective rate  - and drops to 58 per cent effectiveness if taken in the third 24-hour period.

Thus, the move to make NorLevo available over-the-counter is hugely significant. In our view, it is extremely important – from an affordability and equity point of view – that women are now able to get this safe medication directly from their community pharmacy.

However, as a healthcare provider, Well Woman would like to see a stronger connection between accessing emergency contraception and a programme of holistic sexual healthcare. In our experience, emergency contraception visits tended to act as a woman’s first route into formal sexual health services. This entry-point is effectively no longer there with over-the-counter availability of emergency contraception.

Emergency contraception is a very safe form of medication, but it is not a substitute for being on a more long-term routine form of contraception, such as the oral contraceptive pill or mini-pill, patch, or injection.

There are also long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) which include implants and intra-uterine devices, and which will provide contraceptive cover for anything between three and ten years. Increasing numbers of young women are choosing to use a LARC, as many of them have decided they do not wish to become pregnant for the next number of years, and it avoids the need for the proverbial ‘magic bullet’ that reminds them to take their contraceptive pill correctly.

The need to tackle STIs

There is also a huge need to raise awareness around sexual health and STIs. In Well Woman, our doctors always use the occasion of an emergency contraception or routine contraception visit to discuss sexual health concerns with the patient.

To take one of the most prevalent STIs as an example – chlamydia – most young women are aware of chlamydia, and we find they are open to being tested if the testing is discreet, confidential and easily accessible. In our experience, chlamydia is very much a young person’s infection, with around 10% of the under-25s being infected, often with no symptoms. And chlamydia can be cured with a simple course of antibiotics if diagnosed in time, so it’s important to have this conversation with the patient!

There is also a certain amount of confusion for women in that, since NorLevo went over-the-counter, a newer, more effective Emergency Contraceptive has been licensed by the Irish Medicines Board (in May 2012). It’s called ellaOne and it is available only on prescription from a G.P. or family planning doctor.

Women have a choice when it comes to emergency contraception…

So, what’s available in terms of emergency contraception? The good news is that women now have choice (not something traditionally in generous supply in Ireland as far as family planning or reproductive issues are concerned):

  • The post-coital coil – this is the most effective form of emergency contraception (99 per cent +) and must be fitted by a family planning doctor or appropriately qualified GP up to 5 days after unprotected sex. The copper in the coil reduces sperm movement, stopping sperm and egg from meeting. It is the most expensive option, and potentially the most painful (being an invasive procedure).
  • EllaOne – an emergency contraceptive pill, which can be taken for up to 5 days after unprotected sex. It is as effective on day 5 as on day 1, and almost halves the risk of becoming pregnant, when compared to average efficacy rates in the over-the-counter offering, NorLevo. It requires a visit to a GP or family planning doctor, and is less expensive than a post-coital coil.
  • NorLevo – available over-the-counter from community pharmacies. It can be taken for up to 3 days after unprotected sex, and is approximately 95 per cent effective on Day 1, 85 per cent on Day 2, and 58 per cent on Day 3. It’s the most affordable, but also the least effective, of the three options.

Neither ellaOne nor NorLevo is an abortifacient; both act in the same way, by inhibiting or delaying ovulation. Both carry the same potential side effects, which can include nausea, headache and/or light stomach cramping.

A woman needing emergency contraception might not require ellaOne (depending on where she is in her cycle and other aspects of her medical history) but she is best advised to discuss this with her GP or family planning doctor, as it does require a medical consultation to identify which form of Emergency Contraception is best for her.

Alison Begas is the chief executive of the Dublin Well Woman Centre. For further information see www.wellwomancentre.ie

Read: Teen girls on pill at risk of high blood pressure >

Read: Contracepion saves the lives of more than 250,000 women annually >

Read next:

Comments (96 Comments)

  • Judging by the red thumbs here, is it fair to say Saturday night mass is over early?

    Reply
    • Might be more a case of some sly scripting at work. There’s a ridiculously implausible number of anti-abortion votes on the first comment and all it’s follow-ups whereas all other comments are pretty much what you’d normally expect on religion-related stories on thejournal.ie.

      “Contraception is essentially intent to subvert God’s plan and close to conspiracy to murder.” gets 446 votes? If you’re going to rig the voting, at least make it plausible number.

      Reply
    • Maybe people are just not into killing babies.

      Reply
    • Really? A sperm is a baby, John? Can you back this up with scientific evidence? Because emergency contraception merely prevents conception (and it was considered for awhile, perhaps implantation, but this has been largely discredited) so emergency contraception “kills a baby” about as much as me not having sex tonight.

      Reply
    • This is the problem with the pro life side. There are important and valid arguments against abortion just as there are in favour of abortion, but the pro life side make it difficult for others to properly consider their arguments because they lie, exaggerate, whip up fear and hysterically accuse anyone who doesn’t agree with them, of murder or baby-killing. If you guys just stuck to the facts and calm reasoning, you might get more support. You’re making it too easy for intelligent people to write you off as religious looneys.

      Reply
  • Went straight to the comments. The religious right didn’t disappoint, thanks lads, needed the laugh.

    Reply
  • I’ve heard it all now morning after pill is close to abortion seriously get a grip

    Reply
    • Let’s not worry :)

      Religion is dying common sense is winning out. Remember it’s not that long ago condoms were not legal. Damn we were stupid and I notice as a society there is still catholic repression built in. Irish are slowly opening up to things like fetish and exploring sexuality which is a great thing :)

      Might take a few more years to empty the churches but it is on course to happen.

      Reply
    • My favourite is all the nutcases who complain how this must be illegal, totally forgetting that in Ireland, protection of “unborn life” begins at implantation. Awkward.

      Reply
  • Course it’s a great thing :)

    Reply
  • Jean you are either a simpleton or a troll either way give it a rest nobody is asking you to take it get your rosaries of my ovaries

    Reply
  • Niall F 13/08/12 #

    And paddy, the church could have made a huge difference to the spread of HIV. There’s no ifs or buts about it, major screw up.

    Reply
    • @ Niall F
      Hi Niall, I just noticed your comment directed toward me at the end of the article. We all make our own decisions in life, is is helpful if these decisions are well informed. I’m just providing an alternative view of things to that provider by the item author. We decide to have sex of not, we decide to respect life or not. We tell ourselves lies often, just to justify the times we make the wrong decisions, rather than being responsible. Our instincts and our reason, sometimes pull in different directions, life ain’t easy.
      You ask when is it ok to abort?, it is never ok to abort deliberately. However, if an abortion occurs as the result of a required life saving procedure on the mother, where the abortion was not the aim of the procedure, then this is ok.
      I agree with you the church could have made a difference in the aids scenario. You I assume for different reasons to me, but can you imagine the effect monogamous relationships would have had in Africa. The church makes its view clear, but people often follow another god. The spread of aids is dependant on the multi partner view of life so cherished by our societies today. Even when we say we support monogamy, we do all the things that increase our chances of breaking up our relationships, and that in my view includes contraception.
      @ sara wall
      Sara you asked about my family and I’m slow to give additional personal information online. But I do have five children, one in heaven.

      Reply
  • Hi Paddy. While I see your point my own does not in fact prove yours. There is much unprotected sex in Africa but it is absolutely not the case that it’s mainly happening within extra marital affairs! And in fact, had that unprotected sex been protected sex, then the Aids epidemic would not be such. Condoms do not promote more sex, they just promote safe sex. I have seen, firsthand, the abject poverty and scores and scores of children with nothing. And I dont mean nothing in the sense of Ireland nothing. I mean nothing in the sense of sometimes not even a t shirt or pair of shoes to their name.

    I am an advocate of safe, protected sex. When you see, with your own eyes, babies and children with nothing, orphans who’ve lost their parents to Aids, you come to realise that sometimes it is better and kinder for these children not to go through what they do. And yes, some are adopted, but many, many aren’t. They struggle, every minute of every day to just survive. If the churches preached and supported contraception including condoms then much of the pain and suffering of this terrible disease would not have happened. There has been too much preaching about having multiple children, in a continent that can ill afford it. Women die in childbirth, children raise other children and none have a read childhood, many live on the streets, subject to predators of all kinds.

    I am not an advocate of abortion, personally. It is not for me. I however can not and will not malign someone else for choosing it for themselves. It is our right to choose. And as regards the perinatal support in Ireland, there is purely a one sided solution. You mentioned a negative experience of mine, it is not mine but it is of a very good friend and if you knew what they experienced you would very possibly change your mind. There is not a black and white solution to this, life is not black and white, it is lived in a million colours, though black and white is much more comfortable for many and much easier to support.

    Again, I understand you come from a really good place (I hope that doesn’t sound patronising because it’s absolutely not meant to), but there are many statistics and I’ve both read them and I’ve seen first hand the reality of no church contraception support in Africa. You’ve raised other points I’m not addressing mainly because the African question is often bandied about, but it is not often fully understood in its true entirety. I’ve experienced it, trust me, you’ve not read all the statistics. And even if you’ve read many, the ones you’re reading dont reflect the real, full, situation. I wish you well also.

    Reply
    • I left a link up above to an interesting article in the Washington post that may be of interest. The term used to describe the fact that the condoms have contributed to the increase is “risk compensation”. The article describes the effect.
      I have worked on one occasion in Northern Uganda and my experience there would say that whereas they lacked material goods, and food was scarce, the people there exuded a level of happiness one rarely finds in western society. I don’t mean to take in any way from the many areas of extreme poverty and war on that continent.
      There is of course the other key aspect of the churches teaching, just as important as the moral teaching and that is its social teaching. If this were implemented how different the situation would be in Africa.
      Would that all discussions from different view points were as polite as the pair of us.

      Reply
  • About time. Women are the ones left carrying the babies so it is important that there are other options open to them

    Reply
  • Thought this was about emergency contraception not abortion ! Some of the medications or methods mentioned above are not yet licensed in Ireland. Relating to another item on here , it seems minister shorthall is annoyed that medical card holders are charged for blood tests at the GP surgery but she is not one bit bothered by the fact that if the same medical card holder wants emergency contraception directly from the pharmacy , they have to pay for that ! Double standard here , no ? And surely contraception availability is more of an issue than blood tests

    Reply
    • certainly would as the cost for emergency contraception can be prohibitive, ?48 in boots I have heard of some chemists only charging ?15. I’m sure rather than paying out maternity leave and children’s allowance etc, I’m sure the savings for allowing the morning after pill available on the medical card would be enough of an incentive. On a similar note I have been told by more than one person that they use no contraception at all and never have these would be young men who have regular casual sex, what was missing in their sexual education.

      Reply
  • Rob 11/08/12 #

    People who vote for FG are idiots.

    Reply
  • Paddy, ‘having spent some time in Ethiopia, let me tell you that your broad sweeping statements about affairs and multiple partnerships being the reason for Aids in Africa, is both insulting to Africans and incorrect. If you knew as much as you claim, you would know that for example, there are a massive number of strict, orthodox Christians and also strict Muslims. Neither religion advocates promiscuity and/or affairs. I realise that your arguments come from a good place and I have no doubt you are a good man. but just because you say something doesn’t make it true.

    And as for perinatal services in this country for parents whose children will die before/at/shortly after birth, you couldn’t be more wrong. There are no choices, just deliver the child regardless of suffering of baby or parents. I have very close knowledge of this.

    I always find it interesting that so many people claim to be pro life, but yet we have thousands of children in Ireland, living in poverty, with not enough food to fill their little stomach’s, and if all those who claim to be anti abortion were committed to genuinely help out those children who suffer hunger in this country, then that peril would be erradicated. The same is true for those children who suffer abuse, neglect and torture from parents who should never have been entrusted with them, I wonder where all the people who claim to want to protect the unborn are then. It seems that while in utero we’ll protect you, but once you’re out in this big bad world, you’re on your own! I have no doubt that you most likely do your share, but many of your compatriots do not. ‘Just a thought.

    Reply
    • @ Jeanette A McDonald
      Hi Jeanette, I’m afraid what I said is true in general about the extra marital relationships in Africa. But your point is very valid and if anything proves my point. Catholics of course are not the only ones practicing and promoting monogamy. The rates of HIV among practicing Muslims is very low in parts of Africa. But in the areas with run away aids the multi relationships are common. I am not an expert in this area but I do follow the experts papers and opinions on this very important world debate.
      In relation to the perinatal facilities, sorry if you had a negative experience. But I cannot approve the deliberate taking of a life.
      As for your other points, I agree. All of what you say is well worth voicing. I wish you well.

      Reply
  • Niall F 13/08/12 #

    The idea that some guy all in red with a big tail is going to poke me up the arse with a trident for a 1000 years for going with my partner to the pharmacy after a silly ride is just plain stupid. That said, we both agreed not to let it happen again and are now using the pill like we should have been doing. Question I have for the pro choice people, when is it ok to abort? I saw my kids ultrasound after 3 months and that would be way too late for me.. Is there any draft legislation on the issue? I have no problem with religion and respect all pro life people for their views but maintain that if a person feels that they are without the means, commitment or will to raise a child then they should have the facility to abort, just not to late in!!! See roe v wade online.

    Reply
  • If you need this use it,if you don’t need this pill or don’t want it then mind you own business.

    Reply
  • Are all the red thumbs from people who are simply not getting any thus are jealous?

    Reply
  • Eh hello, even if the availability of emergency contraception does lead, in the words of some “loosing of morals” who is anyone to judge what consenting adults do? the fact that they need to go down the route of emergency contraception is a separate issue, it happens in the most committed of relationships more worrying are the morons who routinely use it as contraception is pure ignorance and lack of education and respect for yourself and opens the argument up to society in general which is a whole different problem and nothing whatsoever to do with religion……

    Reply
  • It bears saying loudly and clearly, because even folk who believe it are often reluctant to say so.

    The separation of sex and reproduction is excellent in every way!

    Reply
  • Me thinks Alison that your getting a kickback for this advertisment.

    Reply
  • You have no studies to back up the opening statements, in their place you use a journalistic style of suggesting that a lack of evidence is in fact evidence, which makes for good lefty reading but has no basis in science.

    Reply
    • Barry 11/08/12 #

      there’s no evidence that contraception upsets any gods, any books with rules saying its wrong were written by men….no some invisible being.

      Reply
    • Oh that’s why I’m getting the red thumbs, I’m not looking at this from a religious point of view, I’m all for contraception, I’m a health care professional. The article claims that the loosening of access to the MAP hasn’t lead to an increase in STIs or frequency of casual sex, I’m arguing that the author has zero evidence to back this up, apart from the sky not falling down on us.

      Reply
    • Surely those who think emergency contraception *does* lead to more STIs and casual sex are the ones with the obligation to provide the evidence?

      Reply
    • I know what you’re getting at but I think the point is in reference to the suppositions made by those who are against contraception when the loophole was first exploited. There’s also the fact that you can’t prove a negative but in science a total lack of evidence (and a long term lack) of something happening is sufficient to draw the conclusion that this thing is not happening.

      Reply
  • You people who attack religious believers are disgusting. You claim that ‘common sense is winning out’ yet wouldn’t know it if it kicked you up tbe hole. How dare you discriminate against people because of religious orientation; referring to them as ‘idiots’ and trying to put others down to make yourself seem more intelligent. You work so hard for the right to defend your opinion yet deny others the very same. I dont believe in god, and now i am definitely losing faith in humanity, you should be ashamed of yourselves

    Reply
    • No one called religious people ‘idiots’ here, no one denied any body the right to opine either. One guy was called a simpleton for claiming contraception was like conspiracy to murder and he is entitled to that opinion, however nose- bleed inducingly stupid it is. We are entitled to disagree. Have you ever heard the term ‘strawman’?

      Reply
    • And sure, Lisa, here you are, defending your opinion with no one threatening you or stopping you in any way. And here am I disagreeing with you, and no one threatening or stopping me.

      I guess that whole “stopping free speech” thing is a red herring.

      Reply
  • Niall F 16/08/12 #

    What I was (poorly) trying to point out in mentioning roe v wade was that this issue is so thorny that not even the US supreme court could come up with an answer, the reality of the world today is that if someone wishes to have an abortion they can get one. What I would like to see my home country do is see that these girls get the facility and help to do so in a clean regulated environment, instead of hopping a cheap flight to stansted. (or in the case of the girl from Donegal who had to travel to Dublin for emergency contraception, the mind boggles) But that there is also legislation in place that would identify when a foetus becomes a person, a citizen of our country after which they would assume the protection of the state. We aren’t living in the middle ages anymore, the politicians need to man up and get a grip of this once and for all

    Reply
  • Annie 11/08/12 #

    It’s a classic quote alright. It’s one pro abortionists use, so she didn’t think it up all on her own (-:

    Reply
  • Contraception, a relatively new god with quite a big following, is the greatest invisible scourge in society today. As prophesied in Humane Vitae, fifty years ago this year, the attitude that goes with contraception, separating procreation from copulation is a disaster for mankind.
    Just one or two corrections on the article; 1) The pill is not a medicine, nobody is sick. 2)The morning after pill is an abortifacient, it prevents the new life if it exists from embedding in the womb. The couple have an abortion. 3) There has been a moral breakdown. The public sense of what is right and wrong is now confused. 4) Many, if not most, young persons have multiple, marriage like, relationships. This is new. 5) We are currently I’m the middle of an epidemic of SDI’s, and that is not because of abstinence.
    These are just a small selection of the obvious mistruths, ok lies, in this article. I would say try to form your behaviour based on Truths and Beauty rather than the story of self gratification that leads to death in this life, and the next! We are surely a lot more than sex machines, with a convenient garbage disposal mechanism.

    Reply
    • Contraceptives have been available in Ireland for a good 20 years now and they haven’t proved the downfall of society so y’know you’re wrong on that one!!

      Reply
    • Hey, I have no problem with someone not wanting to access contraception due to religious reasons. The problem is when someone tries to take away my equal right to access something which my religion allows. What about freedom for minority religions in Ireland?

      Reply
    • Not sure if trolling, or actually a serious comment!

      Reply
    • @Gavin Carton
      Contraception is thousands of years old, but it’s widespread use is a new phenomena. Whether or not it has proved to be the downfall of society is a matter of opinion. Do you think people are happier today than twenty years ago? More broken relationships, more single parents, more abortion, more suicide, less faith, less charity; and now what’s ahead of us, the redefinition of marriage, eugenics. Do you really believe there is no connection between these trends and the widespread acceptance and use of contraception in all it’s guises.?
      @Nick Beard
      Well Nick I don’t believe contraception, in any of it’s forms, is good for society; but the article is specifically about the morning after pill and that has the affect of deliberately destroying a new human life, not just preventing a conception. This should be unacceptable to all religions as well as to those without a religion, it is unacceptable to humanity.

      Reply
    • if people are sadder it has got very little to do with what they put in and around their genitals. Saying there is some sort of link is ludicrous!!
      Let’s not even get into a debate about the “redefinition of marriage” cos now you’re just clutching at straws.
      If you think a simple bit of latex has caused the downfall of society then you, my friend, are seriously misguided!!

      Reply
    • I do believe that contraception, the serration of procreation from sexual activity, does lead to an amoral society. Our views differ on whether this is good of bad.

      Reply
    • so you think sex is amoral if it offers any outcome other than procreation?
      Or do you think that becomes people can have sex alot that they’d be willing to kill or something?

      Reply
    • AH! The guy who looks like the Emperor from Star Wars. Who believes that using condoms actually INCREASES the risk of contracting HIV. THAT guy!!

      Reply
    • @ Gavin Carton
      I think sex is great, certainly not amoral. But a society that strives to separate sex from its natural possibilities is amoral.
      @ Tootrue left
      Is this an argument of some sort? I read and listen to all kinds of opinions; combine that with my life experiences. Make full use of the gift of freedom within my faith and my country, and then I express my opinion, even if it is not popular. Do you believe in restricting opinions that disagree with you? Most honest commenters enjoy the exchange of views and we all gain in having the benefit of freedom of expression. I think you should feel free to express your left views, even though you choose to hide behind a pseudo name/ avatar.

      Reply
    • but people are still having sex to have children, some folks who don’t want children use contraceptives. So only half our society is amoral then?

      Reply
    • “Make full use of the gift of freedom within my faith and my country, and then I express my opinion, even if it is not popular.”

      Do you also agree, Paddy, that women should have the ‘gift of freedom’ to use contraception, or to end their pregnancies in cases where the foetus will not live once outside the womb?

      Reply
    • @ Tootrue left
      So you wish to expand the narrow debate on the morning after pill, to include every area of disagreement including the kitchen sunk! Don’t mix up freedom with licence. The morning after pill amounts to abortion and that is taking licence not acting freely. A woman has and should have freedom to remove her appendix, but that is not the same as taking the life of her baby. But I assume you are not open to this understanding of the value of life, I hope I’m incorrect in that assumption.

      Reply
    • Paddy, you know that the inability to separate procreation from “copulation” is a feature of the lives of animals with estrus cycles. Watch your dog or cat. No chance of reproduction – no sexual interest. Ready to reproduce – bingo – can’t get enough!

      The ability to exchange reproductive “copulation” for the wide open creative possibilities in communicative and recreational and bond-enhancing sex is one of the things that makes us human.

      A human-made technology that furthers such explorations by minimising pregnancy and/or STD risk is all plus and no minus.

      However, the ability to twist and subvert our natural desires into something dirty and evil in order to recruit our guilt-ridden selves for the “saving” power of the church is, unfortunately, also part of what makes us human.

      Reply
    • Are you now telling me that I don’t have the right to free practice of my religion because you disagree with it? You’re more anti freedom of religion then any of the atheists above!

      Reply
    • Paddy, you seem to believe, as the Catholic church does, that the act of sex should only be for procreation, you mentioned “to separate sex from its natural possibilities is amoral”. This would only be amoral to a practicing Catholic, and if a recent survey is anything to go by, the majority of people in the country are not religious at all. Surely you don’t assume to impose your views and religion on those who don’t share them?
      As you said prophylactics have been used by the Romans, and probably before them, so they are not new, it was the Roman Catholic church who influenced governments here to ban their use, and later with it’s introduction the pill. I could never understand this, these artificially avoided pregnancy but the Church approved “other” methods such as the rythm method. The end result was the same thing. Good Catholics boinked away, enjoying what was ment to be enjoyed, trying to avoid pregnancy using a very inefficient method, if avoidence had been approved then other more efficeint methods are out there.
      In other countries like Africa where AIDS has reached epidemic levels, public health officials have begged the church to approve condoms, not just as a prophylactic device but as a method stopping the spread of AIDS. They have always said no. This is now not just a matter of faith but many believe it to be a matter of mass negligent homicide.
      The same thing applies in the developed world, STI’s exist, it doesn’t have to be AID’s or HIV so anyone with a sexual partner should always use a condom. Oh, and Paddy, the biggest increase in STI’s is in the over 50′s bracket. Just saying.

      Reply
    • @ Auntie Dote
      Great name, it seems to exude good advice, but of course we are all quite protective and expend much effort at justifying our own misconceptions. We do agree that sex in humans is great.
      But there our views diverge. As conterception use has increased, STD’s have increased. Can you not see the relationship? If your claim was true should we not see a decrease in STD’s. You may see no minus but consider the points already made.
      I certainly have no desire to “twist and subvert our natural desires into something dirty and evil “. I would contend that the best lovers will be those who are versed in self control, those who are willing to love fully and accept all of the natural consequences. The use of contraceptives, or worse still the morning after pill says, I’ll love you, but not just that much. It reduces the love to mere lust, and depersonalises the other person to a device, or a means to a selfish end.
      The view I hold is supported by the church, I think, but it’s true for all in or outside the church.
      @ Nick Beard
      Nick I’m a big supporter of the right to practice your religion or no religion as the case may be, but if your religion says its ok to kill, then I have a problem with that as should any good atheist.
      @ Brian Walsh
      Hi again Brian. No neither I nor the church, to the best of my knowledge, believe “that the act of sex should only be for procreation”. What I say is it is amoral to artificially prevent the possibility of conception. Sex of course enhances our oneness, our commitment, our love one for the other.
      To the best of my knowledge there is no such a thing as the rhythm method, this was slang that facilitated the basis for a series of jokes, the correct term would be the Billings method, or more common today NaPro. I would prefer not to expand the discussion to aids, this will be discussed at another time, it’s the morning after pill was being discussed here.
      Even though I’m over 50, I think the fact that I’m in a monogamous relationship should help with my risk factors. This is also true in Africa and the aids problem, where they found that multiple partners is the biggest contributing factor to the expansion of aids. Changing this practice has a much more positive affect on the aids numbers than the use of contraception.

      Reply
    • If your religion says it’s ok to kill? You are arguing that preventing fertilisation and implantation is killing? This would seriously question your knowlege of embryology. Despite your claims earlier, abortion is removing an embryo or foetus from a woman’s womb – a very different procedure.

      In order for your religious views on the issue to have any persuasive value (rather than just being your opinion), it requires a basis in science. How exactly are you considering contraception to be killing?

      Reply
    • @ Nick Beard
      Well Dr Beard, I’m certainly not an embryologist. My (limited) understanding is that conception normally takes place in the Fallopian tubes, this child then makes it way to the womb for implantation, all going well. The morning after pill prevents the implantation thus deliberately killing the child.
      I do not consider other forms of contraception, which prevent the actual conception, to be killing. These we consider undesirable for all the other reasons mentioned above.

      Reply
    • I’m not a doctor. Actually, implantation (which is obviously not always a given) is when a pregnancy officially begins according to the British and American Medical Associations. Before that, a woman is actually not considered to be pregnant.

      So while you may consider prevention of implantation to be deliberate killing, it’s certainly not considered an abortion and is considered fully legal in the Bunreacht na hEireann. Again, I ask why (if it’s so obvious and non controversial that this is “abortion” and “killing”), it is legal in Ireland?

      The only answer can be because your religious beliefs, rather than medical science, consider it to be killing a baby. And if you can only put forward a religious arguement, then you have no right to infringe anyone else’s freedom of religion or freedom to not have religion.

      Reply
    • @ Nick Beard
      Well Nick I’ll disagree with all on when it’s a human if necessary. I not worried about what agency says what, in my world at conception it is human, it has the full potential, full individual DNA. It cannot become a frog, or a shoe, only grow as the human it is. Even Bunreacht na hEireann cannot redefine it. So to me abortifacient implies an abortion. Others can carry out their own mental gymnastics to persuade themselves otherwise, but to me it is a child.
      Organisations such as the well woman clinics have their own profitable agendas I’m sure, but they relish lack of clarity on these issues, so I for one wish to be clear. It’s a child from conception.
      The freedom issue is such a red herring. Freedom I cry, but then freedom to do the right thing.
      You call on science as a witness but refuse to acknowledge it already has the full, new, individual DNA from conception.

      Reply
    • @Paddy, You are of course right about the Billings method and it’s slang name. When it comes to the churches views on procreation I believe you are wrong that the Church views the act of sex as only for procreation, when my wife and I were married, many years ago, we had to do a pre marraige course and this was one of the many church rules we were told. Even then everyone thought it was crazy.

      1. The marital act must always be left open to the transmission of life.

      2. The use of artificial contraception is degrading to both human nature and to the institution of marriage.

      3. Persons who employ artificial means deny the will of God and actually set their wills in His place.

      4. Birth regulation through the use of natural family planning (NFP) is licit and, unlike the artificial methods, contributes to marital unity.

      As I said what is the difference if the end result is the same, the avoidence of pregnancy?

      With regard to Africa, that particular horse has bolted, so to speak. AID’s is now rampant in many parts of Africa, regardless of how it became like that to preach morals now is, frankly, inhumane and pointless. What is needed is urgent action and for the church to agree that condoms could be used would go a long way towards stopping the further spread of HIV and AID’s in that region.

      Reply
    • It’s a child to you. But clearly you must see why your religious views (which you supported with the Humane Vitae, rather than any scientific evidence) should not be forced on others, especially those with a stronger understanding of the process of pregnancy and foetal development.

      Reply
    • @ Brian Walsh
      Hi Brian good to see you kept your notes. I think point 4 proves my view. The church considers NFP “licit”, not illicit. It believes sex is good and benefits the couple even when there is no procreation. Its positive about the “N” (natural), but disapproves of the artificial. Using the science together with discipline is approved. To love someone enough to avoid sex for three days is considered commendable in certain circumstances.

      With regards to the aids epidemic I disagree, and you have the weight of international and national agencies behind your opinion. When nations said to Africa use condoms, and Africa obliged, the result was an increase in aids. There is a technical name for the effect, which I cannot now remember, but it’s affect is that condoms mean more illicit sex, means more failed condoms, means more aids.
      I would also point out the churches expertise in this area, being the largest non national/international agency caring for the victims. The Pope knows what he is talking about, and Catholics were engaged in helping aids victims every before aids came to Hollywood and the world took notice. I don’t consider it inhumane to suggest to a married couple in Africa that having sex outside the marriage with other boyfriends or girlfriends may put their lives and children in danger. Extra martial affairs are common in many African cultures. So the reasons for the spread of aids in africa and the western world were different.

      @ Nick Beard
      I’m afraid the science agrees with me. Perhaps you should look again and you’ll find the DNA evidence says it unique from conception.

      Reply
    • A zygote does have a unique DNA code from conception. Why do you consider that a more significant milestone than either the beginning of the pregnancy, birth or viability? All are significant milestones. The reasons you believe this is the most significant milestone is clearly due to your religious beliefs. As in, other religious beliefs are equally valid. In the absence of clarity, it seems a bit ridiculous for you to be able to force your views on people, despite the informed beliefs of those who work in the field.

      Of course, my personal favourite is the ridiculousness of people claiming “life begins” at conception. Life already existed!

      Reply
    • And I’m sorry, Paddy, but do you have any actual statistics as to cases of AIDS increasing in Africa concurrently with condom distribution (I’ll remind you that correlation isn’t causation, but I’d settle for an actual discernible agreement in the numbers.

      If not, I’ll assume it’s wishful thinking on your part.

      Reply
    • @ Nick Beard
      The zygotes DNA is the same as the DNA of the adult it will become. It has at this stage the full human potential, only to have the chance it deserves. Nothing else is to be added but it needs food and environment in which to grow, just like you and I. It is fully human and fully alive.
      We do say life begins at conception and that life did not exist as a human before that.

      Reply
    • Again, you patently demonstrate your lack of understanding of foetal development. It doesn’t just need food or an environment to grow, it requires a life sustaining blood donation from another human being. There’s also a strong chance (about 20%) that it will cease to develop for unknown reasons (which is certainly not apparent for you and I.)

      You believe the essential point is that it has a unique DNA sequence or that it is human (sperm and egg cells are human and my mitochondria have a different DNA sequence from me.)

      Your view is one of several defensible views. Again, you’re still citing the Catholic Church rather than any scientific authority.

      Any progress on backing up your claim that condoms in Africa caused a rise in AIDS?

      Reply
    • @ Nick Beard
      Wow Nick, calm down. There are a lot of things we all require at different times to develop. Don’t let my lack of understanding vex you. I believe the zygote is fully human, if you can prove otherwise by your superior grasp of science then please do. I’m actually quite open minded.
      I’m not great at posting links but I hope this will give you some food for taught on the aids/contraceptive issue:
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032702825.html

      Reply
    • Did you ever read the article? It really doesn’t say that the problem is caused by condoms. It says the problem is caused by not using them all the time with multiple partners and actually advocates continuing to make condoms available. That’s not exactly “Africa obliged and the result was AIDS.”

      And interesting how I pointed out flaws in your “zygotes are just like us” and you ignored them. With no scientific basis. As the poster above pointed out, if you wish to make an arguement which will convince anyone who does not unquestioningly share your religious beliefs, you have a long way to go!

      Reply
    • @Paddy I did not keep any notes believe me, at the time we did the course because we had to. What I did do was google it. What we disputed was whether or not the Catholic church believes the sexual act should only be for procreation. Point 1 makes this clear;

      1. The marital act must always be left open to the transmission of life.

      What point 4 makes clear is that if a good catholic couple wishes to avoid pregnancy the only church approved way is NFP, any “artificial means deny the will of God”.
      My point on this topic is that if with NFP, which the church approves of, the goal is to keep semen and ova apart, then what is the difference of using other means such as a condom or the contraceptive pill? The exact same goal is reached, semen and ova are kept apart, and if desired the act can be avoid for 3, 4 or 5 days a month to show how much you love each other.
      I can’t help but find your views on Africa are a little bizarre, you say “When nations said to Africa use condoms, and Africa obliged, the result was an increase in aids.” I would really like to see your sources of information on this, as to how the use of condoms resulted in an aicrease in AID’s.
      You also say you don’t consider it inhumane to tell a married couple in Africa may put their’s and their childrens lives at risk. You say extra martial affairs are common in many African cultures. Ok, so while preaching is fine you’re not prepared to do anything about it. If multiple partners is a cultural issue in Africa then placing a bit of latex on their willy WILL help.
      You are clearly a religious man, but if we were to make the laws of this country based on religious beliefs then who’s religion? Do we allow Sharia law? Why not, it’s no more preposterous than allowing the Catholic Church to decide our sexual habbits. I, like many people believe, religon has no place in making the laws of our country, any religon. I have no problem with the church, untill it tries to tell me how to live my life. Then we have a problem.

      Reply
    • No Paddy, I’d like you to answer the question I asked you. You are a speaker, aren’t you?

      Reply
    • @ Nick Beard
      Well Nick, I’m pretty sure we won’t find common ground, but from my zygote to yours, have a good life.
      The born child is just as dependant on the mother as the zygote. Dependency does not invalidate the personhood.
      It has always been the experience of Catholics that science eventually catches up with what it deduces from the transcendent.

      @ Brian Walsh
      I accept pint 1) as well, but this is not the same as saying sex only when you will definitely have a baby.
      The latex as you put it is deliberately blocking the possibility of conception (at least on the 95%of times they work). From the catholic perspective the “safe” period is still open to life even if it is improbable.
      I don’t believe the laws of the country should be unique to any religion. But Irish peoples recent tendency to reject all things catholic is sad. It so mod to contercept, to abort, to be an atheist, to be ashamed of our history. Perhaps the youth will rebel, as youth tends to do, and go back to the church, reason and beauty. And it could happen.
      The church is quite good at morality, something science is unable to encompass. Therefore when law is being drafted it is certainly worth consulting.
      Good night.

      Reply
    • @ Tootrue left
      When you are one against many in discussions like this, it is very easy to miss individual points, my apology. I presume you are referring to the issue of abortions for mothers carrying a child who is terminally I’ll. I’d imagine only you and I will read my reply, but here is my reply, and it is just my personal opinion.
      This issue as hoisted on the irish public, in a highly emotionally charged orchestrated presentation, intended to manipulate the Irish public by the pro abortion lobby, was a disgraceful manipulation of the severe issues these parents had to endure. It was timed to stir up political support for abortion issues being discussed in government at the time. Shame on those who organised it. It attempted to entrap pro life politicians, and working with the media, orchestrated a one sided debate.
      The children involved were about to die naturally anyway, and to persuade the parents to deliberately take the life of these children adds insult to injury. The parents were already burdened with death, and to tag them with abortion in addition to death was cruel.
      The facts are that there is excellent perinatal services in Ireland. Where the parents grief is supported, and the child is allowed to die with dignity. There are also some cases of where the child was misdiagnosed and a perfectly healthy child was aborted. So we play God at our peril.
      I support life from conception to natural death. Trying to poke holes in that spectrum is not going to change my governing principle.
      In relation to abortion today, we know for instance that less than 0.1% of abortions relate to rape, however this is the main reason abortion was introduced in many countries. We also know that expectant mothers rarely if ever commit suicide, but the threat of suicide is the main reason given for abortions in the UK. The affect of the abortion increases a woman’s chance of suicide by about 80%. So it is indeed a tangled web we weave.

      Reply
    • The Catholic Church is ahead of Science?!!?
      ehhhh……………..no, just no on that one!!

      Reply
    • @ Gavin Carton
      Hi Gavin, I know this is a problem for many, but if you have interest in this area you might like to look at some recent publications by Fr Robert Spitzer, discussing the fine tuning of the universe for instance.
      From the Christian perspective, we believe God created the world and science as it advances is merely drawing back the veil of ignorance we are all subject to in the real world. The church which works in the realm of the transcendental, as well as the real, has certain foreknowledge of god and his creation. This is often expressed in the story of the scientist climbing the mountain of knowledge, he arrives at a plateaux where he is amazed to see a philosopher already seated there waiting for him to catch up.
      The church has always been a leader in, and promoter of scientific investigation. The difficulty is that mankind regularly tries to use this science to work against god, contraception being a good example

      Reply
    • I am curious paddy, how many children have you? you did say you where in a monogamous relationship somewhere below?

      Reply
    • I have lost count of the number of wildly incorrect things said here. Like I tried to keep up while reading the comment thread, but it just wasn’t possible.

      Here are a few choice quotes and how they’re wrong.

      1 – “The pill is not a medicine, nobody is sick” Which pill do you refer to? Is it the MAP or the contraceptive pill? Because the contraceptive pill is actually a medicine. It can help with acne (which if severe leads to serious scarring and septicemia), anaemia, debilitating menstrual cramps (particularly in adolescence) and hormonal birth control is a requirement for some women on particular medications. Women taking methotrexate (for Reynaud’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, cancer, kidney disease and more) are actually required to be on hormonal contraception.
      What of these women? Should they just live on with their disease untreated to avoid defying God’s will? Should they suspend all sexual activity (possibly within a Catholic Church sanctioned marriage) until they are better? The above listed diseases can be treated using drugs other than methotrexate so not all these women are required to be on contraception, but they face massively increased risk of complication if they fall pregnant. If their method of contraception (such as a condom) fails they may fall pregnant and in an effort to avoid massive complications may want to take the morning after pill. Again, should these women suspend all sexual activity until their health returns?

      2 – “it prevents the new life if it exists from embedding in the womb” No, actually it doesn’t. Numerous studies have completely failed to find any evidence that it does anything other than prevent fertilisation. There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that it prevents implantation of a zygote.

      3. – “More broken relationships, more single parents, more abortion, more suicide, less faith, less charity” Really? More suicide? Would you care to prove that? I would argue that since the Catholic church no longer has the power to publicly condemn and shame a victim of suicide or their family that we are only just now talking about it and actually addressing the problem. Now that families don’t have to live in shame far fewer are denying what happened and I would argue that the increased public openness about suicide has decreased the rates.

      As for “less charity”, are you sure about that? Let’s look at the poverty rates now compared with the Victorian era which had laws that supported the morals you hold dear. Let’s see, workhouses, famine, starving children, high maternal and infant mortality, child labour, institutional sexism and racism etc etc.

      4. “The use of contraceptives,…reduces love to mere lust, and depersonalises the other person to a device” Really? I disagree, besides which I don’t see what’s wrong with mutual lust between two consenting adults. What’s wrong with having an enjoyable sex life? I’ve never reduced my partner to a “device” and I’ve certainly never tolerated anyone doing that to me. I love my boyfriend to bits, truly I do and for you to claim that our use of contraception reduces that love to lust and each of us to a device is both arrogant and incredibly insulting.

      5. The claim about HIV in Africa – are you serious? Like are you actually being serious and not trolling? What a ridiculously baseless statement. You haven’t got a single leg to stand on. I agree that multiple partners is a problem only when the person having multiple partners is not taking the right precautions. A major part of the spread of STIs in Africa is the prevalence of rape there. It’s truly horrifying how often it happens. Is a married woman who has been raped and contracted HIV to abstain from sex with her husband? Or is she allowed to express her love for him both through sex and through taking enough care to protect his health? Is a HIV positive woman who takes ZDV while pregnant defying God’s will that her baby have HIV?

      6. “Organisations such as the well woman clinics have their own profitable agendas I’m sure” The Well Woman Clinics are run by the Irish Family Planning Association which is a not-for-profit organisation and a registered charity. Do a tiny amount of research please.

      8. “The church is quite good at morality” – This one I barely feel I need to address, just read a newspaper.

      Finally – Ireland is not the safest place in the world to have a baby. Italy is, Ireland is fourth and behind Sweden where abortion has been legal since 1938 and where they still have some of the most liberal abortion laws in the world.

      Reply
    • 01/01/70 #
      Reply

Add New Comment