State Rep. Don Coram, R-Montrose, is doing the right thing in co-sponsoring a bill to fund long-acting contraceptives. It is a measure that should be supported across the board – and across the aisle.
Coram is carrying House Bill 1194 together with state Rep. KC Becker, D-Boulder. If enacted, it would provide $5 million of state funds to an ongoing program called the Colorado Family Planning Initiative, which was initially funded by an anonymous grant. It provides long-term contraceptives – typically inter-uterine devices (IUDs) or hormonal implants – to young, low-income women. Such contraceptives are safe, effective and obviate the need to remember to take a pill every day or have other forms of contraception on hand.
Since 2009, some 30,000 women statewide have availed themselves of the contraceptives the program offers. State health officials say that has reduced Colorado’s teen birth rate by 40 percent. Coram also figures continued funding for the Colorado Family Planning Initiative will prevent 4,300 abortions per year and save tens of millions of public welfare dollars spent every year on teen mothers and their children.
It should also save countless millions more in lost opportunities and lowered productivity. Coram says that by age 30, only 1.5 percent of teens who get pregnant hold a degree. That miniscule rate represents unnecessarily limited lives and careers cut short before they begin.
Coram put it this way, asking, “If we can do this, make lives better for these young people, save the state of Colorado millions of dollars and prevent abortions, tell me what’s wrong with that?”
Abortion politics it would seem. Sen. Kevin Lundberg, R-Berthoud, fired back, saying IUDs can cause abortions.
“I’m glad,” he said, “that there’s finally some discussion over a very little-known aspect of devices that are used to prevent the birth of a live baby.”
As both his language and his understanding suggest, that is a political or perhaps a religious statement. It is not the way medical science would describe the workings of long-acting reversible contraceptives.
His thinking is based on the political or religious tenet that life begins with the union of an egg and a sperm cell and that, therefore, preventing the implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterine wall is tantamount to abortion. But the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists defines the beginning of a pregnancy as implantation, in which case an abortion could occur only afterward.
In any case, preventing implantation is only one way that some kinds of long-acting reversible contraceptives work. Most act to prevent the egg and sperm from getting together in the first place. It should be noted, too, that medical experts say that in a healthy, sexually active woman using no contraception, as many as half of all fertilized eggs will fail to implant naturally.
Long-acting reversible contraceptives are safe, effective and reliable birth control. They do not cause abortions. On the contrary, by preventing pregnancies to begin with, they result in fewer abortions. They also lead to better lives and better prospects for women. They can help reduce the number of premature births and lessen the chance of a teen birth leading to neglect or abuse of the child. And by reducing the need for financial aid, medical care, child care and other services associated with teen pregnancies, they can save taxpayers money.
Coram is right on all counts. As he said, “If you are against abortions and you are a fiscal conservative, you better take a long, hard look at this bill because that accomplishes both.”