Colorado Debates Whether IUDs Are Contraception Or Abortion

NPR ^ | March 5, 2015 | Megan Varlee

[C19fan]

A popular contraception program in Colorado is receiving criticism from conservative lawmakers who say that the program's use of intrauterine devices, or IUDs, qualify as abortions.

More than 30,000 women in Colorado have gotten a device because of the state program, the Colorado Family Planning Initiative. An IUD normally costs between $500 and several thousand dollars. Through the program women could receive one for free.

This is because the program received a $23 million private grant in 2009 that has covered all its costs until now. To keep going, a group of bipartisan lawmakers are trying to push a bill through the Colorado Senate. But they're running into problems because of restrictions on what the state can and cannot fund.

[C19fan]

Looks like after doing a good job in 2014 not providing material for the "War on Women" narrative some of the GOP want to pour some gasoline on the embers.

[samtheman]

you are right

[MiniCooperChick]

This may be an unpopular opinion around here but an IUD is way less expensive than saddling taxpayers with the results of irresponsibility for 18 years or more.

Additionally, if it’s through a private grant what do they care?

[martinidon]

Really? this is insane. This is where the GOP gets off track on stupid no win debates. Why not debate whether birth control pills are contraception or abortion. Hers a novel idea; since the Colorado legislatures have absolutely no authority to restrict, limit, or ban IUD’s why not work on something worth while, like Jobs and reducing State government spending!

[C19fan]

From the article the private money is drying up so the state is being asked to pick up to the tab. Given the alternative of supporting teen moms for life with their let us say out-of-wedlock kids or paying the cost of the IUD, the IUD is a bargain.

[sparklite2]

The private funding runs out in a few months. The program has been so successful in reducing teen pregnancy, the state wants to fund a continuation. But the anti-abortionists want to conflate contraception with abortion and use a state law prohibiting supporting abortion to stop the program. How one views unwanted pregnancies versus the inevitable support of baby mamas seems to determine where one comes down on the issue.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

At least they’re not blowing up on roadsides in Iraq.
......Oh wait! ..... Never mind!

[2harddrive]

“But the anti-abortionists want to conflate contraception with abortion and use a state law prohibiting supporting abortion to stop the program.”

IUD do indeed cause abortions. They prevent the implantation of a FERTILIZED EGG. Now, it is most likely at the point of that fertilization that human ensoulment takes place. True contraception, on the other hand, like using a condem, prevents the sperm from ever fertilizing the egg.

[sparklite2]

From the comments to the article, conception and fertilization are not necessarily the same thing.

[jobim]

THE FATHER OF LIES brings the world abortion, and all of the demon lies about abortion from those who promote it:

The IUD or intrauterine device is available in two different types in America. The hormonal IUD called Mirena, and the copper IUD called Paragard. Mirena releases levonorgestrel, which is a progestogen. Its primary function is to prevent implantation by the tiny developing human (embryo).

Preventing ovulation appears to function as a distant second. A study of women, one year after inserting the IUD, showed about one-half (45%) of women were still ovulating. After four years, 75% of women were ovulating. Obviously, the greater the number of women ovulating means the higher the chance for fertilization to occur. Other mechanisms of Mirena include thickening the mucus of the cervix, thus not allowing sperm to enter the uterus, or affecting the mobility or survival of sperm.

If fertilization occurs, most likely the tiny unborn child will be prevented from attaching to the lining of the womb and he or she will die. This is a very early abortion.

The copper IUD's effectiveness comes from a continuous release of copper into the uterine cavity; however, they aren't sure why this works. The general consensus is that this is accomplished by preventing implantation of the human embryo.

With both forms of IUD, if the woman becomes pregnant, she has a greater chance of having an ectopic or tubal pregnancy. This is when the tiny developing baby attaches to the lining of the fallopian tube and may threaten the woman's life.

The IUD is not considered safe for women if they have not first given birth to at least one child, have a history of or had breast cancer, or have multiple sexual partners.

http://www.lifeissues.org/abortifacients/

[i_robot73]

Semi-true.

But, you know what’s even cheaper? Personal responsibility w/out sticking the gun of govt in everyone’s wallet.

Private grants soon before public monies when the former dries up but the ‘need’ is still there.

Never does FREE go away.

[i_robot73]

I’d like to know your theory re: fertilization.

From my reading, many a fertilized egg DON’T implant, are rejected, etc. Taking your idea as a start, IMHO, that’s a lot of Limbo residents.

[MiniCooperChick]

Good point i_robot.

Alas, pure Libertarianism can’t coexist with the welfare state.

[i_robot73]

Neither can a Constitutional Republic. Alas, it has been a century gone...