| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Contraception rejection I

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

Letter to the Editor
Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, 8:55 p.m.

In response to obstetrician/gynecologist Rachel B. Rapkin's letter “Contraception confusion” (Jan. 24 and Emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) contain the same synthetic hormones as oral contraceptives (aka “the pill”), but in higher doses. An ECP gives the body a short, high burst of synthetic hormones that disrupt natural hormone production needed for ovulation and pregnancy.

ECPs prevent pregnancy by inhibiting ovulation, or if that does not work, by disrupting egg and sperm transport, or by preventing implantation. ECPs and the pill are not always successful in inhibiting ovulation. This is known as a “breakthrough ovulation” and happens between 2 percent and 28 percent of the time for the pill.

A newly formed life, conceived in the fallopian tube, has all the genetic information of a new human being; all that is needed is time, an acceptable environment and nourishment to become viable. That is why the pill and ECPs have been described as having abortifacient properties.

Since oral contraceptives and ECPs cause hormone-induced abortions, they should not be funded through forced participation in any health plan. There is a safer, more effective, morally acceptable alternative. It is called natural family planning.

Brian & Laura Hall


The writers are certified natural family planning instructors with The Couple to Couple League International Inc. (

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. Updated paving needed
  2. Data misrepresented
  3. ‘Normal’ pitfalls
  4. WQED beyond repair?
  5. Pipelines to the future
  6. Can’t believe ATI statements
  7. Honoring a brother
  8. Good for seniors
  9. The pope & child abuse
  10. Pope & peace
  11. End ‘lookism’