There are a lot of specifically religious and pro-life sites out there, still, that do go on and on about the IUD being an abortifacent. But if you look up the actual studies and medical info, it goes about like this:
-primary method of (copper paragard, not mirena) preventing pregnancy is by creating an environment hostile to sperm with copper ions keeping fertilization from ever taking place -secondary method can be preventing implantation of a fertilized embryo (just like the pill, shot, patch and ring does as a secondary measure after preventing ovulation)
That sucks. And is probably part of why all birth control can be viewed as sinful by some, or as "not right for me", at least. But if you look at the numbers, there are actually less disguarded (unimplanted) fertilized embryos in the tubes of women with IUDs, than there are in women without any kind of birth control.
There used to be some kind of misconception among conservative women that the IUD basically works by scraping the sides of your uterus and so it's like one continuous abortion - but that isn't true. The IUD doesn't move at all, first of all, let alone "Scrape", and it's flexible plastic. Most sperm never even make it into the uterus, and those that do almost all die long before they could reach the tube where the egg is waiting.
I am definitely a "leave it all in God's hands excepting serious medical risk" kind of girl in my own life, and this all weighs heavily on me. But I can deal with an IUD more easily that I can with permanently altering my body to be infertile or with putting hormones in my system (and, ergo, my milk supply...) So, it is what it is.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-04-15 11:32 pm (UTC)There are a lot of specifically religious and pro-life sites out there, still, that do go on and on about the IUD being an abortifacent. But if you look up the actual studies and medical info, it goes about like this:
-primary method of (copper paragard, not mirena) preventing pregnancy is by creating an environment hostile to sperm with copper ions keeping fertilization from ever taking place
-secondary method can be preventing implantation of a fertilized embryo (just like the pill, shot, patch and ring does as a secondary measure after preventing ovulation)
That sucks. And is probably part of why all birth control can be viewed as sinful by some, or as "not right for me", at least. But if you look at the numbers, there are actually less disguarded (unimplanted) fertilized embryos in the tubes of women with IUDs, than there are in women without any kind of birth control.
There used to be some kind of misconception among conservative women that the IUD basically works by scraping the sides of your uterus and so it's like one continuous abortion - but that isn't true. The IUD doesn't move at all, first of all, let alone "Scrape", and it's flexible plastic. Most sperm never even make it into the uterus, and those that do almost all die long before they could reach the tube where the egg is waiting.
I am definitely a "leave it all in God's hands excepting serious medical risk" kind of girl in my own life, and this all weighs heavily on me. But I can deal with an IUD more easily that I can with permanently altering my body to be infertile or with putting hormones in my system (and, ergo, my milk supply...) So, it is what it is.