The inalienable right to life possessed by every human being is present from the moment of initial formation, and all human beings shall be entitled to the equal protection of persons under the law.
Personhood and the Pill
Bill Fortenberry
Note: The article below is a critique of a position held by Dr. Johnston of the Association of Prolife Physicians. After reading this article, Dr. Johnston changed his position, and I believe that he now agrees with the stance that the Personhood Initiative has taken in regards to oral contraceptives. The article links cited in the footnotes are no longer active, but they can still be found through a search on archive.org.
The issue of birth control has become a staple in the clash over personhood for unborn children. The official position of the Personhood Initiative is that a personhood amendment would ban any form of birth control which includes an abortifacient. The big question, of course, is whether or not oral contraceptives have such an effect. Dr. Walter Larimore and Dr. Joseph Stanford published an extensive study in February of 2000 which answered that question in the affirmative[1], but there are still many who disagree. One of those disagreements was voiced by Dr. James Johnston in a 2005 article published by the Association of Prolife Physicians[2].
In that article, Dr. Johnston gives three reasons as to why many pro-life physicians do not believe that oral contraceptives cause abortions. His three reasons are: ignorance, lack of evidence and abortion calculations. Of course, neither ignorance nor a lack of evidence can be used to prove anything. It is interesting to note, however, that Dr. Johnston relies on a letter from 1998 to prove a lack of evidence even though he admits knowledge of Dr. Larimore's peer-reviewed article which presented a significant amount of evidence just two years later. These first two reasons can therefore be disregarded in part because they do not provide evidence for either position and further because the second reason was directly refuted by Dr. Larimore.
Dr. Johnston bases his third reason on certain abortion calculations which supposedly prove that women taking oral contraceptives experience fewer miscarriages. He provides the details of those calculations in a separate article entitled “Oral Contraception Abortion-Rate Calculations.” Unfortunately, the calculations provided in that article contain what appears to be an intentional misrepresentation of the data[3].
The article claims to present a comparison of the miscarriage rates between two groups of 1,000 sexually-active women of child-bearing age. Half of them are on oral contraceptives and half of them are not. Dr. Johnston estimates that 100 of the women taking oral contraceptives will experience a breakthrough ovulation; 25 of them will become pregnant, and 21 of those will experience a miscarriage. He also estimates that 250 of the women not on the pill will become pregnant, and 100 of them will experience a miscarriage. Using these figures, Dr. Johnston concluded that women on the pill experience only one-fifth (21/100) as many miscarriages as those not on the pill, but this conclusion is very misleading.
Keep in mind that the goal of Dr. Johnston’s calculations was to determine if oral contraceptives have an abortifacient effect. To determine this, Dr. Johnston should have focused on the number of pregnancies that end in a miscarriage rather than the number of miscarriages that occur per 1,000 women. When we compare the rate of miscarriages, we can see that women on the pill experience 21 miscarriages for every 25 pregnancies while women not on the pill experience only 10 miscarriages for every 25 pregnancies (100/250). Thus by his own calculations, Dr. Johnston has demonstrated that women who become pregnant while taking oral contraceptives are twice as likely to experience a miscarriage as those who are not on the pill[4].
It is obvious from these calculations that Dr. Johnston cannot rely on any of his three excuses for denying the abortifacient nature of oral contraceptives. He cannot claim ignorance, for he has himself completed the necessary calculations to disprove his position. He cannot claim a lack of evidence, for he is the one who presented the evidence. And he cannot claim that the calculations support his conclusion, for he himself admitted that women taking oral contraceptives are twice as likely to suffer a miscarriage as women not taking oral contraceptives. He clings to his position not because of the evidence nor even the lack of it but rather in spite of the very evidence which he himself produced.
In a comment regarding his research, Dr. Larimore expressed the difficulty that he experienced in coming to grips with the fact that oral contraceptives have post-fertilization effects[5]. He also predicted that many of those who read his evidence will find it just as difficult to accept, and no one who is familiar with the struggle for personhood would disagree with that prediction. Nonetheless, the fact that the truth is sometimes difficult to accept does not in any way relieve us of our duty to uphold and proclaim that truth. The Personhood Initiative will continue to advocate for a ban of any form of birth control that can be proven to cause the deaths of innocent children.
[1] Walter L. Larimore, MD; Joseph B. Stanford, MD, MSPH, “Postfertilization Effects of Oral Contraceptives and Their Relationship to Informed Consent,” Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:126-133, accessed November 13, 2011, http://archfami.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/9/2/126
[2] James P. Johnston, DO; “Do Oral Contraceptives Cause Abortions?,” accessed November 24, 2011, http://prolifephysicians.org/abortifacient.htm
[3] James P. Johnston, DO; “Oral Contraception Abortion-Rate Calculations,” accessed November 24, 2011, http://prolifephysicians.org/calculations.htm
[4] It could also be pointed out that Dr. Johnston’s figure of 100 miscarriages experienced by women not on the pill includes 50 “silent” miscarriages. However, he did not add 50 silent pregnancies to his number of 250 for that group. He also failed to add any silent miscarriages for the group of women on the pill. If his calculations are completed without the extra 50 miscarriages, then we can see that women who become pregnant while on the pill are four times as likely to experience a miscarriage as women who are not on the pill.
[5] Walter L. Larimore, MD; Joseph B. Stanford, MD, MSPH, “Author’s Comment: Postfertilization Effects of Oral Contraceptives and Their Relationship to Informed Consent,” Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:133, accessed November 13, 2011, http://archfami.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/9/2/133
The issue of birth control has become a staple in the clash over personhood for unborn children. The official position of the Personhood Initiative is that a personhood amendment would ban any form of birth control which includes an abortifacient. The big question, of course, is whether or not oral contraceptives have such an effect. Dr. Walter Larimore and Dr. Joseph Stanford published an extensive study in February of 2000 which answered that question in the affirmative[1], but there are still many who disagree. One of those disagreements was voiced by Dr. James Johnston in a 2005 article published by the Association of Prolife Physicians[2].
In that article, Dr. Johnston gives three reasons as to why many pro-life physicians do not believe that oral contraceptives cause abortions. His three reasons are: ignorance, lack of evidence and abortion calculations. Of course, neither ignorance nor a lack of evidence can be used to prove anything. It is interesting to note, however, that Dr. Johnston relies on a letter from 1998 to prove a lack of evidence even though he admits knowledge of Dr. Larimore's peer-reviewed article which presented a significant amount of evidence just two years later. These first two reasons can therefore be disregarded in part because they do not provide evidence for either position and further because the second reason was directly refuted by Dr. Larimore.
Dr. Johnston bases his third reason on certain abortion calculations which supposedly prove that women taking oral contraceptives experience fewer miscarriages. He provides the details of those calculations in a separate article entitled “Oral Contraception Abortion-Rate Calculations.” Unfortunately, the calculations provided in that article contain what appears to be an intentional misrepresentation of the data[3].
The article claims to present a comparison of the miscarriage rates between two groups of 1,000 sexually-active women of child-bearing age. Half of them are on oral contraceptives and half of them are not. Dr. Johnston estimates that 100 of the women taking oral contraceptives will experience a breakthrough ovulation; 25 of them will become pregnant, and 21 of those will experience a miscarriage. He also estimates that 250 of the women not on the pill will become pregnant, and 100 of them will experience a miscarriage. Using these figures, Dr. Johnston concluded that women on the pill experience only one-fifth (21/100) as many miscarriages as those not on the pill, but this conclusion is very misleading.
Keep in mind that the goal of Dr. Johnston’s calculations was to determine if oral contraceptives have an abortifacient effect. To determine this, Dr. Johnston should have focused on the number of pregnancies that end in a miscarriage rather than the number of miscarriages that occur per 1,000 women. When we compare the rate of miscarriages, we can see that women on the pill experience 21 miscarriages for every 25 pregnancies while women not on the pill experience only 10 miscarriages for every 25 pregnancies (100/250). Thus by his own calculations, Dr. Johnston has demonstrated that women who become pregnant while taking oral contraceptives are twice as likely to experience a miscarriage as those who are not on the pill[4].
It is obvious from these calculations that Dr. Johnston cannot rely on any of his three excuses for denying the abortifacient nature of oral contraceptives. He cannot claim ignorance, for he has himself completed the necessary calculations to disprove his position. He cannot claim a lack of evidence, for he is the one who presented the evidence. And he cannot claim that the calculations support his conclusion, for he himself admitted that women taking oral contraceptives are twice as likely to suffer a miscarriage as women not taking oral contraceptives. He clings to his position not because of the evidence nor even the lack of it but rather in spite of the very evidence which he himself produced.
In a comment regarding his research, Dr. Larimore expressed the difficulty that he experienced in coming to grips with the fact that oral contraceptives have post-fertilization effects[5]. He also predicted that many of those who read his evidence will find it just as difficult to accept, and no one who is familiar with the struggle for personhood would disagree with that prediction. Nonetheless, the fact that the truth is sometimes difficult to accept does not in any way relieve us of our duty to uphold and proclaim that truth. The Personhood Initiative will continue to advocate for a ban of any form of birth control that can be proven to cause the deaths of innocent children.
[1] Walter L. Larimore, MD; Joseph B. Stanford, MD, MSPH, “Postfertilization Effects of Oral Contraceptives and Their Relationship to Informed Consent,” Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:126-133, accessed November 13, 2011, http://archfami.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/9/2/126
[2] James P. Johnston, DO; “Do Oral Contraceptives Cause Abortions?,” accessed November 24, 2011, http://prolifephysicians.org/abortifacient.htm
[3] James P. Johnston, DO; “Oral Contraception Abortion-Rate Calculations,” accessed November 24, 2011, http://prolifephysicians.org/calculations.htm
[4] It could also be pointed out that Dr. Johnston’s figure of 100 miscarriages experienced by women not on the pill includes 50 “silent” miscarriages. However, he did not add 50 silent pregnancies to his number of 250 for that group. He also failed to add any silent miscarriages for the group of women on the pill. If his calculations are completed without the extra 50 miscarriages, then we can see that women who become pregnant while on the pill are four times as likely to experience a miscarriage as women who are not on the pill.
[5] Walter L. Larimore, MD; Joseph B. Stanford, MD, MSPH, “Author’s Comment: Postfertilization Effects of Oral Contraceptives and Their Relationship to Informed Consent,” Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:133, accessed November 13, 2011, http://archfami.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/9/2/133