What’s All This Fuss Over A Uterus Anyway?

When I initially contemplated writing a blog post on the Contraceptive Choice Project conducted by researchers at Washington University Medical School, I had planned to take a much different approach. However, as you all may have noticed, I tend to like including interesting videos or articles in my blog posts to make them more interactive. As I searched for something to add to my blog post, I stumbled upon a provocative article from the National Catholic Register, “America’s most complete Catholic News Source.” The article, called “The Shocking Ethics Behind the Contraceptive Choice Project,” argues that while the study was successful on the surface, it was really a hidden failure that could devastate already at risk populations.

            Jennifer Fulwiler, the author of this article, states that providing free birth control increases the rates of sexually transmitted diseases and is just another form of eugenics aimed at sterilizing minority populations. One of her most shocking pieces of evidence was that “in 2010, during the time of the study, the city of St. Louis saw a 46 percent jump in syphilis, a 31 percent rise in gonorrhea and a 3 percent increase in chlamydia.” (YIKES!). While she acknowledges that the director of the local Health Department sees these increased numbers as the result of increased reporting, she criticizes the Contraceptive Choice Project’s lack of concern with STD rates. This, combined with the fact that the researchers actively recruited women from low-income minority groups, led Fulwiler to conclude that the study aimed to render the women in these groups infertile (and apparently laden with STDs). She goes on to argue that there is a slippery slope from providing free birth control to performing complete hysterectomies on women of disadvantaged backgrounds.

           While I disagree wholeheartedly with her slippery slope claim, I had to consider if there was any truth to her other statements. The reality is that the researchers pushed women to choose long lasting birth control methods and encouraged even young women with no children to choose options like Mirena, even though the manufacturer does not typically market to this group. Was this all a scheme to help reduce the ever-growing African American population? Doubtful. However, I find the concern over possible increases in STDs rates to be the most valid since using a long-term birth control method may decrease a women’s likelihood to require that her sexual partner wear a condom (why the burden lies on the female is a completely different issue). It will be interesting to see how scientists respond to the combined issue of decreasing unplanned pregnancies while decreasing sexually transmitted disease rates at the same time. Perhaps they will follow the advice most likely to be given by a columnist in the Catholic News Source and make recommendations for strict abstinence only programs in school. Or perhaps they will find another way. Only time will tell.