Please post your comments to week 4’s readings on contraception here.
Remember that your contraception assignment is due this Tuesday and that you will present the information in class!
Please post your comments to week 4’s readings on contraception here.
Remember that your contraception assignment is due this Tuesday and that you will present the information in class!
I was recently reading an article about a woman with an intellectual disability (ID) and her child, who was very bright. The story focused upon the fact that mothers with ID can be loving and successful care providers, though they often need assistance from others. However, up until very recently, women with ID were hospitalized and institutionalized, and most often sterilized, since it was hypothesized that they could not be efficient mothers.
Because of this, I was very interested in reading “Quinacrine Sterilization in India: Women’s Health and Medical Ethics Still at Risk.†Knowing that sterilization is still being practiced anywhere in the world is a disturbing thought, especially for a woman. Women are so often seen as vulnerable and malleable, that it is easy for Indian women to be taken advantage of, and given no rights to fight back. It is scary to read that these women are essentially forced into being sterilized by this method, and brings up the idea that there is an underlying problem of female sub-ordinance within this society.
I was curious in the quote from Dr. Ashi Sarin, who mentioned that most of the procedures were completed in ‘high risk’ women, and what this meant. What were these women at such a high risk for that they had to be illegally and permanently sterilized? I agree with the fact that it is completely unethical for doctors to be administering this type of banned sterilization without informed consent from patients, and that “no civilized government can allow this,†according to United States doctor Elton Kessel.
It makes me glad to know that living in America will practically ensure the fact that I will not be subjected to unlawful sterilization, and that I will be granted rights to be informed of what is happening to my body by the doctors I see. However, I believe it is wrong for these Indian women to be subjected to this type of unethical sterilization.
Motherhood! According to the articles women no longer have choices but women never had any choices in the first place. We do live in a patriarchal society where decisions have always been made for women even if it only concerns them and this is an example of contraceptives. Contraceptives seems like they have been around forever, therefore this could mean that women are either trying to limit the amount of children that they have or there is a need or more like a scare for the reduction of the “tremendous†population growth. Instead of figuring out solutions to adapt to worldwide population growth, genocides, racism, and blaming women have emerged out of many societies.
Contraceptives are very controversial in many ways. Some women use contraceptives because they want to limit their reproduction that also has some key factors like socioeconomic status which ties to financial issues etc… Contraceptives have even made its way through politics where again it goes back to the whole population control for fear of overpopulation. Many women are encouraged to use contraceptives especially women with low income status. Though contraceptive methods have proven to have worked within the years, there are many side effects such as weight gain, excessive bleeding, and discomfort etc… Women with high incomes and good health insurance are under medical supervision and proper care for these side effects however, women with low income are not that fortunate because of lack of insurance or proper medical care. In some of the articles, it is also said that many of the low-income women are being pushed to use contraceptives because they are believed to be “bad†mothers or mothers who can not provide enough for their family, therefore end up being eligible for government programs like Medicaid etc… and in turn causing the government more money. Is it wrong to believe that some women should not have children because of their economic status? I feel like if you cannot take care of yourself then why take on more responsibility to take care of others? But that does not mean that women should be exploited and use as lab rats without their consent. Many women in Puerto Rico were given contraceptives and having their tubes tied without knowing the real consequences. Women of all races and economic status should have the right to decide what’s best for them and how they should treat their bodies without constant social pressure.
Of all the readings this week one stood out to me the most, not for it prose particularly but for the tortuous memory of it days later. I appreciate the sentiments that were put forth in the writing of Norplant, Quinicrine sterilization (which seems to me to be absolutely barbaric!)and Depo Provera (in which I have my own personal vendetta) and after these readings, and the readings of last week I did in fact feel that there appears to be a huge manipulation of women in regards to “population issuesâ€. The issue of safety comes up often, but it appears it is not truly in the forefront of priorities. Personal experience aside, injecting or inserting long term hormonal contraception into women not only can awful side effects but not enough is known about the long term consequences of playing with the Hypothalamic-pituitary system especially when women are being exposed at such young ages and for many years.
Devices and Desires…….it was like reading a Hitchcock story, truly can this be real? The ups and downs of inventing contraception’s to the culminating horror of the Dalkon Shield. This has bothered me for days; I couldn’t read it without flinching and crossing my legs! And this all happened not too long ago! I then see an ad on TV urging us to contact a lawyer for an evaluation if we had any kind of reaction to Jasmin, Yazz or Ocella,all of which seem to have been targeted to younger or teenage women. Is this a repeat of Dalkon avarice, every woman should know and understand the Dalkon story, her reproduction and any future choice of reproduction Is hers and hers alone regardless of her standing in society. It appears that contraception has been supported by those who primarily support population control….would you trust them? The Dalkon story could have joined the ranks of “A Civil Action†and “Erin Brochovich†had it not been for ….H R Robins…. being bought out…the end…..who got what? Did E C Robins retire happily? The pioneers of women’s rights and freedom to use contraception, Margaret Sanger and Marie Stopes her British counterpart exposed themselves to society and went against the grain would surely turn in their graves at what has happened in the evolution of female contraception and its abuse over the decades, from greed to supposedly controlling population explosions or maybe they wouldn’t as nothing has really changed. The balance of power it appears still lies in the same place.
I was interested in this week’s readings because I had recently watched a movie titled the Constant Gardner. In the movie, when a diplomat tries to investigate the murder of his wife, he runs up against a drug corporation using Africa’s population for fraudulent testing of a drug with notorious detrimental side effects whilst ignoring the well-being of its poor African trial subjects. After reading the article on Quinacrine sterilization in India, I began to think that the basis of the movie plot may not have been entirely fictional. The fact that a large scale clinical trial had been conducted that put some many women’s health at risk was a violation of their human rights in my opinion. The fact that in many countries these trials were covert shows that they were both unethical and illegal. The idea that even five years after the ban on this type of sterilization, medical practitioners were still using quinacrine goes to show the risk of weak or no regulation as well as the lack of monitoring when it comes to healthcare ,that encroaches low income countries. What is more disturbing is that people devoted to fighting population in developing countries and immigration to high income countries such as Dr. Kessel and Mumford head large organizations. His quote “The explosion of numbers will come from the immigrants and their offspring and will dominate our lives. There will be chaos and anarchy. It’s even more serious than the nuclear threat. The threat of immigrant invading and taking over is real, they are swarming all over and draining resources†speaks to the fears many people in high income countries may have. This can be seen particularly in the US within any immigration debate.
The articles on Depo-Provera and implanon were eye opening. The benefits of Depo- Provera posits that women face the mental challenge of remembering to take their birth control therefore making these long term methods of contraceptives ideal. My initial thought when reading this article was that since women have all these issues surrounding menstruation including pain and moods swings as well as the cost associated, why not put the same effort in creating a similar contraceptive for men? Why burden these poor women that are often perceived as irresponsible with one more thing? Why does it only seem to be a woman’s fault? Because the women targeted are touted as being irresponsible do they bank on them not reading about the side effects of this methods? Is this ethical?
After reading the “Quinacrine Sterilization in India: Women’s Health and Medical Ethics Still at Risk” article, I came to know, how thousands of illiterate women in India and Bangladesh have been made guinea-pigs without their knowledge in unauthorized trials of a contraceptive drug which is known to cause irreparable damage to the reproductive system. I agree that mostly everyone agrees that India’s biggest problem is its population, which has soared from 350 million a half century ago to nearly 1 billion today. But using the “Q method” to sterlize a woman is very dangerous, it can cause a lot of complications to a women’s heath. The crazy thing is, knowing that it could be dangerous for a woman to get “QS” some Indian doctors were baffled, even angered, when the government
banned quinacrine, an inexpensive anti-malarial drug that has been used for
two decades in a non-surgical method of female sterilization. Quinacrine’s advocates praise it as accessible to even the poorest of women in rural India. Opponents criticize it for just that reason, contending a method that the World Health Organization says could cause cancer is being used on Third World “guinea pigs” . Many poor Indian women have opted for quinacrine sterilization because it does not force them to stop working, and it allows them to keep the decision from husbands who may not want them to stop having children. Quinacrine is not approved for use in the United States. Nearly all major family-planning organizations, many foreign governments and the World Health Organization oppose its use for sterilization. Indian doctors who have performed quinacrine sterilizations said the ban has more to do with politics than medicine. A large part of the controversy around its use has arisen because the drug is exported to Asian countries free of cost by two American doctors who have links to anti-immigrant groups in the United States.
In the end, I just want ot say that a lot of women mostly from the poor South Asian subcontinent, die every year from complications arising from childbirth. Health facilities are less than rudimentary, with federal spending on health in India averaging about 30 cents a person, which is very sad and heart breaking.
Long lasting birth control methods such as IUD’s, Depo Provera, and Implanon have been used as a way to control how often women have children, when women have children, and what groups are allowed to have children. Many groups that are targeted to take advantage of these types of methods include poor women, teenagers, and women of color. These women may not understand what they are putting into their body and how it can effect their overall health. In the article by Jennifer Malat, Racial Differences in Norplant Use in the United States, she discusses how how greater educational achievement may be related to contraceptive decision making. Educated women may not choose to use long lasting methods such as Norplant because they have more access to information about possible side effects.
I believe that when considering a long lasting method of birth control it is important to be well educated on the different types of methods available. Many women do not have access to that information or feel pressure from a doctor or insurance company to get the most cost effective or easiest method that doesn’t require any extra thought after insertion in the body.
These articles described poor women, teenagers, and women of color as being irresponsible. It was implied that without the guidance of a medical professional they wouldn’t be able to choose the method that work best for their individual situation. I don’t believe these women to be irresponsible. I believe that many of these women are coerced into using birth control methods that they are not fully comfortable with. Instead of physicians targeting certain groups and encouraging them to use birth control methods that ultimately put the physician in control. These individuals should be given more access to the information they need to make educated and thoughtful decisions about what birth control method is right for them.
Learning about IUDs and long-acting hormonal birth control methods like Norplant, Implanon, and Depo-Provera really emphasized to me how there is a strong element of “patient control” in the use of birth control methods such as these as opposed to quickly reversible and self-controlled methods like the Pill and the Patch. I liked how Megan Greenberg pointed out that “temporary sterilization” methods of birth control “have a different feel to them” and that women who use them are at the mercy of the doctor who implanted them or injected them. It is heartbreaking and fundamentally unfair that some women who decide to use Implanon are left with it inside them even if they want it removed because of horrible side effects or the decision that they want children. If, for instance, a woman lived in a rural area, as Greenberg shows, then she really would not be able to see a doctor often enough for her needs as an Implanon user to be met. Furthermore, this leaves the woman powerless, especially if she then cannot afford to have the Implanon removed! As someone who takes the Pill as my chosen contraceptive, I appreciate more than ever that I am not powerless and can choose to stop my birth control at any point.
I also was somewhat disturbed by the suggestion in “Contraception in Context” that abortifacients will someday be prominently used as contraception and that many women will probably choose this method as their only form of contraception! I think this is a bad idea because it promotes irresponsibility and leaves out the fact that women and men both need to be protected from STDs. Also, I can’t help but think that there would be several emotional consequences if women someday use abortifacients as their chosen method of birth control. To me, this is just reckless and does not seem to be in the best interests of both the men and women seeking the right method of birth control.
On a similar note, I am not sure that I agree with the sale of Plan B over the counter (without a prescription). A good point was made in the emergency contraception article: women may be more easily and unwillingly coerced into sex if they are told that they can “just take a pill” the next day to solve all their problems. I may sound like a mother, but I realize now more than I did when I was younger that there are many many emotional changes that come with the decision to be sexually active with anyone. Thus, I am somewhat disheartened thinking that young girls might more often be coaxed or convinced to have sex before they are ready. Preventing pregnancy is not the only thing one has to think about with the decision to have sex! If a young woman decides to have sex before she is fully ready just because she knows she can just pop a pill the next day to avoid pregnancy, I am worried of the very real emotional consequences she will have to deal with. A pill to prevent pregnancy is not anymore of a “magic bullet” than any other method of contraception.
Reading about IUDs in particular made me, like many others I’m sure, absolutely cringe. The promotion of the Dalkon Shield was a heinous reminder of just how far a company will go to promote its product. There cannot be a complete disregard for human safety and well-being just for the sake of what one group believes is “efficiency” or “profit”. I could not believe the nerve of the Dalkon Shield makers for actually blaming the affected women’s lefestyles and choices on the problems they were experiencing with the highly flawed IUDs they had been attacked with! To me, it seemed that there was a complete disregard for the actual well-being of the women involved, many many of whom suffered miscarriages, infections, hysterectomies, and even death all because an IUD company was so sure it had found the answer to the world’s birth control needs, which are, by the way, different for everyone.
Most importantly, I think that all the readings of this week really found common ground on the concept of reproductive justice, which is not just choice, but also about women’s fundamental rights to control their own bodies and conceive children when and how they want to, without needing to think about how society will jusdge them based on their race, class, sexuality, nationality, age, or any other social factor. To do this, it needs to be understood that there will never be any “magic bullet” of birth control, but rather, there will always be the perpetual need to understand the needs of women as individuals, each with their own needs, concerns, and interests.
This week’s readings were quite eye opening. Until this class I never considered that women were coerced and sometimes forced to partake of birth control methods. I personally take the birth control pill and I guess because I’m middle class and white my doctor trusts me to take it every day. I’ve never even been given the option of another birth control method let alone a different brand of the pill, my doctor started giving me sample packs and a prescription as soon as I asked for it without any hesitation. I’ve heard of Depo-Provera, and I guess I thought that most women who took depo chose to. Same with the IUD. I saw commercials on tv for the Mirena IUD of a middle class family woman talking about “choices” which showed her moving all over the country with her husband and two kids and then at the end it shows her last “choice” which was to have the device removed and have another baby.
All that changed in my mind when we watched the video on the women of Puerto Rico in the last class. I don’t know how the government of any country, much less a territory of the United States can get away with sterilizing women without their completely knowing what was going on. Then again, I do know how. It relates to what we talked about in our previous class with repressing people of lower SES and not giving them all the information and choices they are entitled to.
The article that I found most compelling was the IUD article. From the commercial I saw I thought that IUDs were the safest and best birth control ever. Little did I know the history of the IUD. The Dalkon Shield was a bomb waiting to explode from the start. The debacle with Davis, the creator of the Dalkon Shield, and his conflicting interests in touting the shield as safe while standing to make a commercial profit is just the kind of thing that we should watch out for. So many women were injured by the Dalkon Shield because of lies and coverups over the course of a few decades that it’s not really a surprise to me that it took a few decades for the IUD to begin emerging again. Now there is a class of young women like myself who had no knowledge of the history of the IUD who see it simply as a way to totally eradicate the possibility of pregnancy.
At the end of the article on IUDs the quote from Judge Miles Lord who heard the trials against A.H. Robins sums up one of the major problems with birth control. Men created the Dalkon Shield and marketed it to women as safe and pain-free. They then tried to persecute these women for alleged promiscuity to debase their character on the witness stand. Would these men have done this if they were women? I think a fitting punishment if these men had uteri would have been to implant them with a Dalkon Shield and see what happens. Unfortunately, they didn’t and that is the problem. To these men birth control is profitable and playing on women’s trust of medical authority allowed them to injure thousands of women. But they didn’t really care because they didn’t have to use birth control or worry about reproduction.
This leads me to wonder if it’s a good or bad thing that there is an open market for birth control. On the one hand women get lots of options but on the other they can get bad information and possibly be harmed. I like to think that the FDA now does a good job of protecting women, however one only has to look at the recent slate of commercials for the birth control Yaz which states the previously undisclosed complication that could arise from its use: stroke. They also clarify that Yaz is only effective in treating PMDD not regular PMS. The original commercials didn’t disclose this. They implied that Yaz was a miracle. You don’t need to get twelve periods a year! And PMS is reduced! This shows a failure of research which occurs with a lot of different drugs for a lot of different ailments. A product is rushed onto the market without being thoroughly tested and only after people begin using it do we discover that there can be horrible side effects. Or like in the case of the Dalkon Shield the company may know the side effects and risks but market it anyway because they just don’t care. Unfortunately the people who suffer most from this are the people that need the most protection and help.
In our society, science is used to legitimize nearly any political argument, but particularly political arguments involving women’s reproductive bodies. When considering the debate on over the counter (OTC) emergency contraception, “the powerful authority of biomedicine to narrate and thus produce ideologies of bodies (individual, embryonic, social, and political), sexuality, and selves†(Wynn and Trussell) becomes quite evident. The Social Life of Emergency Contraception in the U.S. article made me really think about this debate from both sides of the argument.
I have always described and thought of EC pills such as Plan B as “morning-after pills.†Without really realizing it (and ignoring the blatant “contraception†in its name), I had assumed EC’s were more like immediate abortion-like pills rather than a later form of contraception (and personally, this did not bother me in terms of my potential use of it, though it may bother others). It seems with popular phrases like “the morning-after pill,†EC’s take on more of an abortifacient form than a contraceptive form in our everyday language. However, this article explained these two perceptions of EC’s in a way that made me realize how easily arguments can be made against EC’s with the use of such language manipulation. Thus, the “morning-after pill†may be seen as an empowering, “peace-of-mind†term, but it may also be seen as a term hinting at “immoral†abortion.
One of the greatest concerns with opponents of OTC EC is the perception of “irresponsible,†sexual women abusing the drugs like candy. The fear that EC availability will make women less inclined to “take pregnancy into consideration before engaging in risky sex†(301) or even take the risk of STD’s into consideration before engaging in sex is also made a great concern. Here the concept of “risky sex†not only denounces women’s sexuality and pleasure in sexual activity, but it also makes them seem irresponsible in what is taken to be a very serious matter. In addition to this negative assumption, many arguments against OTC EC also encompass a language that places women as sexual victims and victims of uncontrollable sexuality. By not having doctors prescribe EC, the stereotyped weak and incompetent woman is thought to be at a greater disadvantage and further victimized. These opponents’ fears are certainly based on cultural constructs of female sexuality, and the manner in which debates such as these are argued, using science and medical reasoning, is inevitably saturated with cultural and social implications and mores. Thinking about this particular debate, it is aggravating to me that debates surrounding men’s sexuality (such as with Viagra) are far less political and challenging than those surrounding women’s sexuality (such as with Plan B) and this is a clear result of cultural constructs related to male and female sexuality.
This week’s readings, especially the emergency contraceptive article brought up a lot of tough personal questions. I was talking to a friend about emergency contraception this summer, and she had learned at her (very conservative) college that EC was an abortion pill. Although I had learned that EC wasn’t abortion, I didn’t know how it wasn’t so I didn’t quite know how to respond to my friend. So, I went to the Internet and looked around and found so many competing reasons about why and why not EC was “abortionâ€. The article by Wynn and Trusell pointed out, in my mind, that this debate about whether EC is or is not abortion and furthermore the abortion debate is almost destined to fail in a sense because the terms of the debate have granted personhood to a fertilized egg. The implications of “zygotic life,†are further complicated by, “complex and social meanings of a fertilized, but unimplanted eggâ€. If these are the terms of debate, than it seems to me that any time a women consents to sex then she is consenting to the possibility of having an egg fertilized. Even if a woman is on birth control, there still is a very very slight possibility that an egg may be fertilized. Science still isn’t sure about how all these processes work. My concern is that one day, when the processes of fertilization and hormonal birth control is completely understood in the terms of pregnancy prevention, that consenting to the “zygotic life†terms of debate now, will have devastating consequences in the future. Science is a double edges sword that can enable women to enjoy their sexuality while allowing them to choose whether or not their sexual activity results in pregnancy, but it can also make it harder for women to separate the two when conception is defined, but birth control options remain limited and the “female body sacrifices for the sake of the abstract entity of “lifeâ€, be it a zygote embryo, or fetus, or even the potential for life represented by sperm make their way toward an eggâ€. Science can be used as a political process, because scientific terms and ideas can also plays into the political relationship between the individual female body and the body politic and how often moral and societal questions about what constitutes life, gender roles, and individual decisions play out in female sexuality. Scientifically defining what counts as “life†can be argued by both sides of any reproductive rights issues and by consenting to the terms of the debate, it in a sense further complicates and “confirms an anthropological truism: namely, that a pure science or health argument cannot be neatly dissected from the larger political processes of assigning cultural meaningâ€.
I’ve read books in the past detailing the deceptive practices of pharmaceutical companies when creating, manufacturing and marketing drugs, but I was surprised and appalled at the levels the company selling the Dalkon shield went to to hide how dangerous their IUD was. Now that we have read multiple articles showing the ways that long term physician-controlled birth control is marketed and used in minority women living in a low wage bracket it is actually not surprising that a large manufacturing company would lie about the fact that its IUD caused infections that killed women or caused infertility. They probably didn’t think that killing a percent of the minority women who use it was a large problem as long as they were making money and preventing a “population problem.†IUD’s were not just used by minority women or by poor women, but that was the intended user.
The article “Contraception in Context†brought up a point that I think is important for understanding human’s desires for or reasons for having children. In the United States we consider children to be commodities that we have to spend a lot of money to feed, clothe, school, and provide other necessities for and therefore we as a society believe that reproduction is a privilege that should be reserved for those with the resources and time and attention to give to a child. However, not everyone in the world or in the United States sees having children in that way. We may see poor women with large families as selfish but that is based on our socially-constructed vision of what parenthood entails. I also agree that it is important to know the difference between population control and birth control because they are so frequently confused. Population control stems from an opinion that we should decide who should be able to have children and when and how many because we face a “crisis†of overpopulation that is largely a fear that white middle class people will no longer be a majority, while birth control stems from the idea that women should be able to control and regulate their own fertility however they would like to. I know that in the past I would have said that the two are similar since both provide access to birth control. However, those in favor of population control want to be able to control women’s reproduction and use methods that are physician-controlled as a way to decide who gets to reproduce while those in favor of birth control want women to be able to control their reproduction, including being able to decide to have children if that is what a woman wants.
I think that the article on the FDA hearing for making Plan B over the counter was fought largely by those for birth control and those for population control. Those in favor of population control were on the side of not allowing Plan B to be over the counter because that would put control of fertility in women’s hands rather than a doctor’s. Most people against Plan B being OTC felt that way because they equated Plan B with abortion, however, we need to look at the roots of power in our society to see that the arguments used against Plan B being OTC were all based around the idea that if a doctor can’t prescribe Plan B then it will be used coercively or instead of regular birth control by “irresponsible†people. The idea that those people are irresponsible, as the article states, is one that is rooted in our society, we see doctors as being the ones who know what is best for us because they have a medical degree and we see certain groups of people as if given the chance to prevent pregnancy after having sex then they will take that option and never think about other forms of birth control because we see certain groups of people as inherently lazy. I agree with the tone of the article that keeping Plan B as prescription only, which the FDA had ruled at that time, was incorrect and was keeping with a classist and racist system that is the modern medical complex. We really shouldn’t try to control women’s reproduction based on what we feel is best because we (as a society) aren’t actually the best ones to decide for women, each woman should be able to decide whether or not to reproduce and how they will go about doing so or preventing themselves from doing so.
Many of this week’s readings made me sick. I really do not consider myself a feminist but I do get angry when women are deprived of their choices and treated as helpless creatures that need guidance. People who deny women equal access to contraceptives because of their race, background, or just because they oppose the specific contraceptive are a huge detriment to society.
If I ever saw Susan Crockett (who is on the board for the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetrics and Gynecologists – what an oxymoron) I would sure give her a piece of my mind. I found her debate to have no scientific or moral backing. As an OB/GYN, her argument is that if EC becomes OTC, she will lose patient-doctor relationships. That is 100% not true. I would still consult my OB/GYN regardless of how or by whom I receive my medicine. My doctor is the expert and I would still need and value his or her professional opinion.
Another opinion that disgusted me was the idea that making EC OTC would increase the ‘incentive’ for sexual assault or rape on women since they could not become pregnant. First, this is something I like to call a ‘bean up the nose’ – giving someone a (bad) thought or idea they may not previously have thought of. Second, this putting the old stereotype of women as weak and defenseless which does not do anything productive for society.
Another article I did not like for other reasons is ‘Contraception in Context’. I found it to lack any real description on the vast majority of contraception options. It spent little time on mainly outdated and unpopular contraceptive methods and barely covered barrier methods, one of the most widely used methods in today’s society. In fact, the authors did not even seem too enthusiastic about barrier methods, which does not sit well with me.
Finally, the ‘Different Takes’ articles bothered me the most. The fact that people equate contraceptives and vaccinations or use contraceptives in a negative way is disgusting. Contraceptives are supposed to help women and their partners in having a healthier and safer sexual relationship.
I find reading about contraceptives very interesting because the information gained applies to my life. I am a user of oral contraceptives and after reading the article “Searching for Something Better” I am certainly glad. It was frightening to find out all of the details on the experimentation with IUDs. I thought it was horrible that they could put something on the market that they really didnt know the risks of. The women that used these experimental IUDs had a fairly high rate of either conceiving or becoming very sick. To me the risk is not worth it when there are so many other contraceptives out there. The male condom is definitely the easiest form especially for females that eventually do want children. The rate of failure is less than one percent and the condom actually helps prevent STDs rather than causing more illnesses. I did not like that this article set apart the wealthier females from the females that were supported by the taxpayers. Although it significantly decreased the costs for the taxpayers it was not right to put these women (who were thought to be less responsible) on something that could potentially be harmful and uneffective. They also saw it as a job well done if they reduced the unwanted pregnancies for a lower income community but said that the same success rate would not be acceptable for a wealthier community. They treated the cases as statistics rather than actual people. Whether an unwanted pregnancy came from a wealth house or a low income house it is all the same to the people that the pregnancy effects. It is not up to the doctors to determine who is not responsible enough to take their own contraceptives. It is fine to administer contraceptives to people if they know all of the risks and the reliability of it. It is not okay to trick low income women into having a procedure done so that they do not conceive any more children that the taxpayers would have to pay for. Every woman should have her own choice. Personally, I like oral contraceptives because they are so widely used. Also, The Pill can lessen severe cramps and acne. I like having control over taking the pill every day rather than relying on a doctor to place something in me that is supposed to work but you dont know it doesnt work until you get pregnant. In the article there was a quote that was bragging that a doctor could intert one IUD every 2.5 minutes or so all day long. To me this doesnt seem like something to brag about, it means that the doctor rushed through to get to the next patient and there is no telling if the doctor did a good job.
I find the articles on contraception interesting because I can relate. I have been on the pill for years and started looking into alternative methods because I forget to take the pill everyday. I can honestly say that the information I found made the side effects sound harmless and as if they only happened to a few women, not entire populations. The article by Professor Gubrium and Ferrer of their analysis of Depo Provera was interesting because it along with Implanon were two of the methods I had looked at over the summer. The negative side effects were never pointed out to me before and now seem to outweigh the positive of using Depo. I am also lucky enough to be a middle class female who has the resources to get to a doctor every three months, pay for the injections and be in a committed long term relationship. Other women who may be interested in Depo may not have these resources or the information about what they need to do additionally to prevent pregnancy and STDs. Eugenic issues have never occurred to me before this course, which may be because of my class and race. I have never been talked to about long term birth control even though I have been on the pill, off and on, for 6 years. It is unfortunate that the typical population of those on Depo are judged as unfit to be mothers. The terms used to discussed “unplanned” pregnancies are always negative, creating a discourse for pregnant women.
I wanted to write about the IUD topic, which amongst others articles also seems to be a hot topic. Especially Ilovebueno’s comment, because I find it interesting how everyone takes readings and digests them differently, sometimes compared to their own life. What I realized about the IUD is that I never realized how long it really takes for something to be “official” and for people to really “trust” it on the market and in society.
The IUD went through many different stages, many different people tried coming up with their own version and many failed. Some seemed to make progress but then at the end nothing seemed close to perfect. The number of people that get almost experimented on is ridiculous, but if it was not tried on people we would never have some of the effective products that we have on the market today. It is almost like other women before us were the guinea pigs for the IUD treatment. Many got sick, infections, miscarriages and many even died, because they thought that it would prevent pregnancy for them and were told it was what they should do, but at the same time, they are the reason for us to have the option and to take the caution we can take if we have the education to know what processes the IUD has been through given this article.
I also find it a little ridiculous how long it takes for something like the Shield form of the IUD to be taken off the market! There were hundreds and hundreds of phone calls according to the article complaining about the Shield and health problems because of it. These people were just brushed off or were told to believe that it was normal or it was caused by something else. As time passed, the number of complaints, injuries, infections only increased. Unfortunately, the creator of the Shield, Davis, was more in it for the money rather than for that actual benefit of women. Davis was not the only problem though, so were the Doctors that were implanting the Shield in women. Even after they received phone calls about the problems, it did not stop them from continuing to take other peoples money and continually “treating” other women! If Doctors stopped, then it would mean that they were wrong and therefore their practice may not be as credible. It is not difficult to see why a Doctor may not be willing to give up giving the treatment, but at the same time, if one is in that line of work and they are their for peoples health and for others benefit besides their own, then having taken a closer look at the Shield when complaints started coming in may have been a wise idea.
Thousands of women were implanted with the Shield and eventually at the end after it was taken up with more Doctors and brought to the level of court, there were millions of dollars spent on having this specific IUD removed and settling various cases for women and the health problems that it had caused them.
This was almost like a major case study, but not put in the form of a case study, because each new person that came up with a new form of the IUD was supposed to be better than the last and people believed it. They were told, some manipulated into believing it was the best thing to do, instead of taking the pill, that this way they did not need to be “responsible” to try and remember to take the pill regularly.
This article, completely put things in a different light for me in terms of the way things come to be. To this day, though the Shield was not a long time ago, there is no IUD that has been noted to not cause any problems, but that seems to go with any form of birth control. Like I said before, I never realized how many trial and errors creations go through. I never thought how every generation will always be the guinea pig for something whether or not they know it, because at the current point in time, they are told to believe it is right or they do not have access to any other options or access to the research. We are all ‘guinea pigs’, being ‘experimented on’ to better the next thing that comes out.
After reading the article, “Implanon, A New and Improved Bullet†by Megan Greenberg it was making me realize that the control over women and their reproductive health. The article talked about the use of a plastic rod that is inserted into a woman’s arm and continually delivers a dose of the hormone Progestin. With it’s 99% effectiveness, and the fact that it is maintenance free for up to 3 years makes it a viable choice among many young women. Some of the women who are unable to afford other forms of contraception, such as birth control pill or condoms agree that this method works for them and allows them freedom along with peace of mind. Women of color, poorer women, and teenagers are the main users of this product. Although this may sound like an easy choice, there are many different cons that go along with this method. One example of this is the fact that some women experience miserable side effects. Also, if woman has the implantation inserted is forced to wait the full three years to stop it. This means that if she wishes to have children during that time period, her choice is not available. This means that a right that women have to birth children is taken away and a personal choice is no longer available. The ultimate goal in society should be to improve the stigmas surrounding sex and to equalize the view of men and women in relationships. This allows for women to be in control of their own lives and not having to rely on other people making their choices for them. After viewing the video about Puerto Rican women being sterilized in mass quantities it was clear to me what a huge step back that was in women’s rights. It took away any choice that those women could make and they were manipulated into that decision. Being sterilized, even temporarily, such as this implantation method, makes reproduction and human creation a statistic that people are trying to control.
It does not surprise me that countries are making women go through a sterilization process. The part that really surprises me is that the doctors are not letting the women know exactly what the process is that they are going through. The women were not only unaware of the process that they were going through, but they also did not know what they would be going through after the surgery. Along with this video the reading on “Quinacrine Sterilization in India: Women’s Health and Medical Ethics Still at Risks†by Rajashri Dasgupta made it clear that some of the sterilization clinics are not doing what they are meant to. Most of the women were not even asked for a signature when they decided to go through with the surgery. In a follow up study there was proof that the surgeries were botched. Some women had cervical erosion and inflammation that required long term care. Women also bled on touch during internal examinations. Many of these women have been deprived of their ability to marry or have more than on pregnancy, while there are women living in the United States giving birth to eight children at a time. Women should not be deprived of their own free right to have children. There should be more of a emphasis on making sure that people are using protection, so that there are not as many unplanned pregnancies.
In our nation today there are many different kinds of contraceptives. After reading the article “ Flagging an invisible difference in a Cost- Benefit Analysis of Deop- Provera†by Aline Gubrium and Amy Ferrer I realized that there were different ways to look at using contraceptives. Depo- Provera prevents teenage motherhood, which is on the rise in some areas of America. Therefore paying for depo-provera through out the year would be more cost effective than potentially having a teenaged pregnancy and worrying about paying for the costs that come with having a baby.
These two articles prove that with the right amount of contraceptive information women would be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want to be on the drug. Women in foreign countries would not have to subject their bodies to the government. Women should be allowed to make their own decisions along with guidance from those that are knowledgeable about the topic.
A couple of the articles included the idea of differences of cost-benefit analyses for women. As discussed in terms of Depo-Provera, this concept means that the risk-benefit analysis of a contraceptive is different for women of different socio-economic levels. This primarily stems from the perceived ‘difficulty’ of a contraceptive—while taking a birth control pill everyday at the same time for one women isn’t no thing, for others an alternative is necessary. If this distinction was to end here with personality types being the main predictor for which contraceptive is used, then we could leave it at that, but that is not the case. This distinction has been made by academics and physicians along the lines of race, age, and class, with the poor, the young, and people of color seen as untrustworthy to take responsibility for their own fertility. The reasoning then is that it is much more important for certain women to stop having babies than the implications of any side effects or risks. In a project I did on the off-label use of Cytotec (misoprostol) as an abortifacient, I found similar issues. Although the use of Cytotec might be more dangerous than other methods of abortion, it’s cheap and readily available in many countries that restrict abortions. The question is should these women be under different standards of safety and efficacy because of their social context? While I mostly looked at the global implications of the use of Cytotec, I also found evidence of it being used in the United States for women without access to standard abortion procedures. Should such a procedure be advertised and taught to women without any other options, but will bring immediate results or should we focus more on expanding access to other forms of abortion, albeit a much longer road that doesn’t necessarily bring results to women with unwanted pregnancies now?
Since this weeks reading are in regard to contraception I thought I would say a few words about my personal experience with such. I have continually been astounded by the degree to which partners have not wanted to use condoms and have asked if I would just go on the pill. I have always been adamant about using a condom because for me the risk of STDs is of equal if not greater concern than becoming pregnant. All my partners have voluntarily used condoms the first couple of times but I have never once had a time where a partner did not complain about using a condom and ask if we could just have sex without one after we had slept together for a couple of times. These have in no way been uneducated individuals and yet I find my experiences to be quite startling. There concerns have been overwhelming about me becoming pregnant and not about STD contraction. To me this is just quite crazy because I would much rather find myself in a situation where I was unexpectedly pregnant as opposed to a situation where I had vaginal warts that reoccurred throughout my life and controlled what I was able to do with sexual partners for the rest of my life. So, obviously there is something I am not seeing or understanding.
I think that this experience speaks about two things. The first is the overwhelming focus on pregnancy, birth, and really the economics of population and having children. The second is that although sexual health is often spoken about in medical ways what we leave out is the experience. Sex is pleasurable, and although I have never worn a condom I believe I have enough history with them to say that they reduce pleasure, especially for males.
I figure my experiences are not too far from others and figured this personal account was particularly relevant to the discussion of contraception.
I am truly astounded by the readings and the video from last week. I recognized that such sterilization procedures were a problem however I had not idea the extent to which they were performed, specifically in women were knowing consent was given. These articles helped me to put into perspective the articles from last week that spoke about overpopulation propaganda. The reading this week really helped put into light how propaganda of overpopulation truly restricts and harms.
My question with regard to the readings is one about what could effectively combat these abuses. With regard to the article about India it was explained that this procedure was made illegal by the supreme court but irregardless it continues in excessive numbers despite its illegality. Is the problem exacerbated because there are no legal reparations for people doctors and drug companies that perform and/or support illegal operations/procedures. How in other words can this be combated?
Lastly, I would like to say that the “contraception in context†article was helpful to pin down much of the science that is behind what we are discussing. Also, it provided a truly holistic picture.
Reading through some of these articles I see a number of issues about women’s control and ways in which the society and even the government have more control over a women’s body than the women themselves. Although I’m not a fan of contraceptives due to my own personal and spiritual beliefs, I do however believe in women’s rights and being able to have a choice and a voice in all aspects of their lives including their health. I feel that society especially the government try to persuade our thoughts on issues such as women’s reproductive health on what they should do. In the article “Flagging an Invisible Difference in a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Depo-Provera†mentions how more minorities are taking Depo-Provera, especially African Americans and that the pregnancy rates have dropped since this new contraceptive has been out. The article states that “low-income women of color report that healthcare providers attempt to limit their childbearing more often than the childbearing of middle-class white women. Ethnicity and social class are shown to be significant predictors of whether healthcare providers will discuss long-term birth control options, such as sterilization or provider controlled contraceptives, with a patient.†It makes you wonder why this contraceptive has been suggested more to minorities than anyone else. This all ties back to this idea of over population and how society has implemented this idea that we need to stop over population. Which ties into the next article that also caught my attention and really made me think about how women are being treated as guinea pigs rather than a human being was “Quinacrine Sterilization in India: Women’s Health and Medical Ethics Still at Riskâ€. It boggled my mind how a lot of the women did not know much about the procedure and the effects that it could have on their bodies. In my opinion the doctors were careless with the way they went about the procedures. It was unethical and illegal to have put so many women in a position to be put at risk for other disease that this type contraceptive might cause. Many of the medical practitioners are trusted by the women and so they will do what they need to do for what they feel is best rather than what the women feels is best for her body. In order to make a good choice you must outweigh all your options and it looks like many of these women did not get to outweigh their options, they were unable to choose what was best for them but were told what was best, which is two different things. When it comes down to reproductive health it is very important that women have the best available option for themselves and they are able to outweigh their options no matter what anybody may tell them but that make their own choices for their bodies.
The article entitled “Flagging an Invisible Difference in a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Depo-Provera was particularly eye catching for me because, before reading this article, my knowledge of this form of contraception was very weak. I had heard of Depo-Provera before, but did not know much about it at all. Now I know that it is a long term form of birth control, in the form of a shot taken every 3 months. Personally, this would not be the option for me. I am good at remembering things, such as taking pills on a daily basis. And I think that the idea of not getting your period for that long is very scary, because you do not have a monthly reminder that you are not pregnant, and may not notice that you are pregnant until you are further long (if for some reason the contraceptive renders ineffective, such that the individual may be taking anti-biotics. On the other hand, I had never really considered how costly it is to manage your menstruation, in terms of money as well as society.
I think that the Depo-Provera shot is a very controversial form of birth control. On the one hand, health care providers are particularly offering this long term birth control to women based on ethnicity and social class, and perhaps teen mothers with low income who cannot take proper care of a child. It is believed that these women are not responsible enough to take a pill every single day, and therefore wind up pregnant. However; there are many awful side effects that involve the women to take proper cautions and care of themselves. For instance, since bone loss is a side effect of Depo-Provera, it is important for the women using this contraceptive to monitor their calcium levels and maybe take daily pills. Although, it is helpful to have a 2 week grace period rather than 1 day, when on the pill.
I think that it is also controversial because healhtcare providers rarely mention these long term birth control methods to successful white women capable of taking care of babies. For instance, my doctor just prescribed me the pill. I did not even know what Depo was, my doctor failed to mention it, because of my ethnicity and high social ranking. This is unfair because some of these upper class women may be just as forgetful as ethnic and low income women. Also, I feel that even though the rate of success (.3%) is much lower than other contraceptives such as the pill, the side effects may not even be worth taking this birth control at all. Bone loss, significant weight gain, delay in fertility, and higher risk of contracting HIV and STDs are all severe consequences that should not be taken lightly.
This week’s articles were interesting as well as educational. I was surprised to find out about the many different types of contraceptives as I had never heard of some of them before. It was fascinating to read about the different procedures that are performed in order to insert some contraceptives and the length of time some need to remain in a woman’s body. I am pleased to see that prevention of pregnancy and protection for a women has become such a significant topic and that continuous research is being done in order to find find a contraceptive that is effective as well as healthy for the female.
However, after reading through \Quinacrine Sterilization in India,\ I am disgusted to learn that thousands of women in India were experimented with quinacrine sterilization (QS) by doctors even after the ban of this dangerous contraceptive by the government. I am furious to learn that out of all of the women that were interviewed that received ‘QS’, none of them had been told that it was an unauthorized method with health hazards. What angers me the most is that personal consent was not given by these women to have ‘QS’ performed on them! How can such procedures be performed without consent or knowledge given to the patient about what is going to happen and the risk of side effects? Women have a right to know what is being done to their bodies! This article reminded me of the video we watched in class about \la operacion\ performed in Puerto Rico. So many uneducated women around the world are undergoing such procedures without any knowledge of the negative impact it could have on their futures. I feel that it’s a personal violation of human rights.
\Flagging an Invisible Difference in a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Depo-Provera\ was one article that was very interesting to me. This is mainly because I have personally never heard of depo-provera so I was definitely exposed to something new and effective. After reading, Depo-Provera, although having it’s disadvantages and side-effects, seems to be more effective than the pill. How come depo-provera is not advertised as often as the pill? There should be more advertisements if it is as effective as it sounds.
I found the part where depo-provera is described as convenient for women who do not have to deal with a monthly period as comical and very true! I completely agree that menstruation does come with a cost! We become moody, bloated, physically in pain, nothing fits right, we begin to have unusual cravings, and on top of that dealing with the cost of this monthly bleed! Perhaps this depo-provera is a good buy as it an effective contraceptive as well as convenient for most women.
After reading this article and reading others’ blogs, I realized women go through many difficult experiences in the world including abortions, child birth, miscarriages, sterilization, etc. The fact that they are able to get through such difficulties and still come out on top amazes me. You go girls!
The reading that really struck me this week was the article written by Rajashri Dasgupta about Quinacrine sterilization in India. The article was similar to the movie that we watched in class about Puerto Rican women sometimes being forced to have surgeries (i.e. getting their tubes tied) making them sterile and unable to have children. The only difference in this article was that the Quinacrine sterilization procedure was non-surgical and used synthetic anti-malarial quinacrine pellets that were inserted into the uterus through an intra-uterine device. I noticed in this article that women were sometimes being spoken about as inferior beings, “The explosion of numbers will come from the immigrants and their offspring and will dominate our lives. There will be chaos and anarchy. It’s even more serious than the nuclear threat… the threat of immigrants invading and taking over is real, they are swarming all over and draining the resources”. It seems as though women are being compared to some kind of animal or parasite that feeds on what “normal” people need to survive, and are a complete burden on society and brings an unbalance to the world, therefore they should be exterminated or controlled. Again, like last week’s readings, the idea of contraceptives (specifically QS in this case) are being used as a technique for population control. In the media, contraceptives are usually promoted to empower women and encourage them to take control of their lives by allowing them to make the decision of when they want to get pregnant. But in this article and in the movie we watched in class, we learned that women in third world countries such as India and Puerto Rico are not really given an option to choose for themselves. I agree with The_Fallen that women should be allowed to make their own decisions about their lives since it’s their own bodies. I don’t believe it’s ethical for a government or any group of doctors to make a life-changing decision for somebody else. Many of the women who were sterilized either by a surgical procedure or through QS admitted that they did not give consent or were not well-informed of what the procedure was or what consequences it would have after the procedure was performed. Since the women who were sterilized had the procedure performed by a doctor who they “trusted” they had no reason to believe that their cooperation would affect them for the rest of their lives. I don’t believe it’s right for anybody to take advantage of another person because they are from a third-world country, doesn’t know any better, or is illiterate… I think that everybody is able to make their own choices/decisions as long as they are well-informed. Women are human beings, not animals, so it would be ideal to stop treating them as such by taking advantage of them and using them as experimental test subjects.
Until this class, I only knew of China that tries to control their population with the “one child rule”. But reading these articles and from watching the movie from last class, I learned that many women around the world are being forced to control their pregnancy. I asked a few of my friends who are not in this class how they feel about women being forced to use contraceptives or if it is okay for the government to take control when it comes to birth control. This turned into a big discussion because some of them felt that families should get fined if they exceed the amount of kids they are allowed to produce. I explained to them how in many societies children help produce food or cash income and are an asset to their families instead of being an inconvenience.
Women should have a choice when it comes to keeping a child or not. Although I certainly do not agree with abortion, I feel if a family or a woman feels she is unfit or unable to be a mother she should be able to make that decision. The low income women who are encouraged to use contraceptives, use them not realizing the harm they are doing to themselves. Some of these contraceptives put women at risk of developing cancer. And this all goes back to the socioeconomic status where high income women receive better medical treatment in case they receive side effects from using contraceptives oppose to those who are among the low income women.
I know a friend who got pregnant twice while being in college. She got an abortion the first time and kept the child the second time. She wasn’t on birth control but was having sex regularly and I believe was using a condom occasionally. She decided to abort her child the first time because she knew she was still in school and felt should wouldn’t be able to be the mother the child deserved. I guess she felt some type of regret because when she got pregnant again, she decided to keep the baby. And now when I see her she looks sooo happy.
I’m just curious, for anyone that is against abortion because of the fact you are killing a living thing. How do you feel about contraceptives, for example using birth control pills. Are you against it as well? Why? Feel free to comment. I would like to hear opinions
There were so many new things that I’ve learned from reading all of these articles about the many different contraceptives and their affects. Growing up, the only contraceptives that were constantly taught to me were condoms. When I first became sexually active at a very young age, my partner and I used condoms but as soon as I got into a serious relationship, I didn’t think that I needed to use condoms anymore if my partner just pulled out. I thought that if nothing bad or unexpected had already occurred after several of times, I had nothing to worry about. I had unprotected sex for four years and was very fortunate to have not gotten pregnant.
As soon as I took a sex education class in college, I realized that my decisions were absurd. I put myself and my partner at risk of STI’s and even pregnancy. I learned about the many different methods of contraceptives, but only briefly about them. The contraceptive that was most appealing to me was the birth control pill. I didn’t like the thought of being injected with a needle or having a rod surgically placed on my arm. I considered myself responsible enough to remember to take the daily dose. It’s been two years now and I must say that it has been very effective. However, the cost has raised so much in a year and sometimes I do reconsider other options. I wish that this information was more available in high school so that many sexually active teenagers, like me, would be more cautious about their actions.
In reading all of these articles, what stuck out to me the most was when the author in “Flagging an Invisible Difference in a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Depo-Provera†perceived young women that were on Depo-Provera “irresponsibleâ€. First of all, I think it is a very responsible act for them to even consider using a birth control method. Second of all, some people may have a very busy schedule that they can’t keep up with using the pill around the same time every day. I sometimes forget to take my pill but that doesn’t make me “irresponsibleâ€. Third of all, birth control pills have gotten so expensive that I might not be able to afford it every month. I’m sure that there are many other young women that are in my position and would probably better off making purchases every three months. Depo-Provera, or any other contraceptive users, are not “irresponsibleâ€, but choose a method that would fit best in their everyday lifestyle.
I think that in the end, every woman should have the right to have sex, to have sex with who they want to with and when they want to, to use what contraceptive they want, and to know the detailed facts about the contraceptives before they use them. I am very fortunate that I have these options and information open to me, whereas women in other countries, especially in densely populated third world countries, are forced to use contraceptives without any further knowledge about it. It is the government’s responsibility to be able to educate their people about sex and the many methods of contraceptives available to them.
After reading all the articles, “Quinacrine Sterilization in India: women’s health and medical ethics still at risk†article stuck out to me. When I hear that women in more 3rd world countries are used to try new drugs I feel really sad. These women are unaware of the effects of these trial methods and are put in unsafe health situations. QS is a non surgical method of sterilization by the synthetic anti malarial chemical quinacrine. This method is also permanent. Women in India usually opt for these methods due to it being convenient and cheap. Even though the government has banned it a lot of low class women do not agree. The lower class women are not educated enough to understand the full complications of this method. Their husbands also are happier since it is cheap.
This reminded me of the video we saw in class. Puerto Rican women were being operated on for sterilization without knowing, doctors and nurses were lying them to. Different methods of sterilization are experimented on with lower class women. I think the government oversights needs to be improved in places all over the world when it comes to women’s health. I do understand why some women choose these dangerous methods. Since we are not facing the same daily struggles as these lower class women it is hard to relate sometimes.
All of the articles this week (once again) highlight the centrality of hierarchal power structures in society, in particular the (heteronormative) patriarchy, along with other structures related to race and class, in the valuation of the personal experiences of individuals.
One idea where this I see this is with teen pregnancy being seen as “problematic” or “a national issue” that needs correcting, and in particular, pregnancies of non-white or lower-status women. This attitude was discussed in both articles on provider-administered contraception as well as in the EC article.
One aspect of this situation with regard to teen mothers that I think is not often given much weight, or even mentioned is that of agency, that is, the argument that teen mothers have human right to do what they feel is in their best interest. The calculus of the patriarchy in making the benefit-cost analysis regarding teen motherhood does not take into account the benefits mentioned by Gillespie and Hubbard, that of children being “a source of love, self-esteem, and social recognition that women may find hard to come by in other ways.”
If you’d like some parody/sarcasm/humor regarding the “construction of zygotic bodies” as practiced by some more conservative elements in the US, see
Sorry, the link for the humor is: The Zygote-American Community’s Battle Against Porn at http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2008/02/zygote-american-communitys-battle.html
In response to Blush, I agree that what feels so awful about the IUD or Implanon or Norplant types of birth control is that women who use them are at the mercy of the doctor who implanted them or injected them. I completely agree that “it is heartbreaking and fundamentally unfair that some women who decide to use Implanon are left with it inside them even if they want it removed because of horrible side effects or the decision that they want children.” It seems that a woman who decides that this type of birth control is best for her, must also have access to regular medical providers and have “medical care” and I emphasis care not simply medicalization. With any medical procedure especially a procedure done to your genitalia, there is profound sensitivity and discomfort and an enourous amount of exposure, so I see that having access to competent and compassionate doctors who give them info about their bodies and their choices is an integral part of this type of birth control. Unfortunately this is not how it plays out for many women.
From the movie that we watched in class about the sterilization campaign in Puerto Rico, I identified with the way a doctor referred to birth control as “an individual right” and the choice of what type to use, is a complicated one where many different choices are offered. The coercive way in which sterilization has been used on poor women across the world is absolutely dehumanizing and in situations where women are not informed about their choices (like their husband is signing papers to have them sterilized) was such a violation and see why this was done- to benefit the multi-national companies by increasing profits in some situations by 500% for women who labored in sweat shops etc. We discussed in class that these are the ways that the government and people with power act our their decision making on women’s bodies.
The article about EC struck me as particularly interesting because it dealt with the intersection of the politics of sexuality, the medical construction of biological processes, and the discourse of public health.
It made me think of what the public health response would have been to providing EC without a Rx. But as the article points out it is useful to look at EC not through the lense of an abstract public health issue, or even as a scientific study on medical safety, or even from a “what if perspective” (teen rapists, teen playboys) but showing the practical implications of restricting access and how complicated the system is that makes it more difficult than they feel it should be. The argument was made that “I should have access to EC even if I cannot afford health insurance and a visit to the doctor”. I thought that was a really powerful statement of just speaking to the restrictions that women face around reproductive health if they do not have health insurance. It also showed the power the doctors have for women without insurance, the doctor is prohibitively expensive, the decision to use EC or not use EC can be a financial one. I am relieved that it can now be purchased in a pharmacy without an Rx if you are 17 and older. It just shows how these decisions cannot be framed in neat clear ways of simply biomedicine or health argument, but are intertwined in complicated ways to morality, politics, ethical, rights, and self control.
I appreciate the work we do in public health that allows us to look at the intersections of all of these very complex and interdependent decisions regarding ultimately the health of our bodies and the health of our world.