Premium
Rights to emergency contraception
Author(s) -
Weisberg Edith,
Fraser Ian S.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
international journal of gynecology and obstetrics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.895
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1879-3479
pISSN - 0020-7292
DOI - 10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.03.031
Subject(s) - emergency contraception , beneficence , medicine , unintended pregnancy , autonomy , reproductive rights , pill , family planning , intervention (counseling) , domestic violence , condom , family medicine , population , law , poison control , nursing , medical emergency , reproductive health , environmental health , suicide prevention , political science , research methodology , syphilis , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv)
Emergency contraception (EC) provides women with a safe means of preventing pregnancy following unprotected sexual intercourse or potential contraceptive failure, and is accepted as a legitimate method of fertility control. The right of women to access EC, along with other contraceptive methods, needs to be affirmed. The consequences of unintended pregnancy are serious, imposing appreciable burdens on children, women, men, and families. Every child has the right to be a wanted child and not enter this world because its mother was denied access to EC. For maximum effectiveness, barriers to access must be removed. It is essential that EC pills are available over‐the‐counter with no minimum age for access. There is a tension between the rights of women to access EC without medical or legal intervention and the rights of providers who have a conscientious objection to provision on religious or moral grounds. The principles of autonomy, non‐maleficence, and beneficence all weigh in favor of the rights of a woman faced with the possibility of an unintended pregnancy to unrestricted access to EC against providers whose religious views are opposed to this.