Birth Control or Abortion?

In my last post, I discussed an article that talks about republicans opposing government funding for IUDs in the state of Colorado. In this post, I will discuss an article entitled, “Colorado Debates Whether IUDs are Contraception or Abortion,” featured in Health News from NPR. I have never correlated using IUDs with abortions until reading this article. I read in the article that upwards of 30,000 have received IUDs through the Colorado Family Planning Initiative for free, and that IUDs normally cost $500 or more. The Colorado Family Planning initiative received a private grant that amounted to $23 million. There is a bill trying to be pushed through the Colorado Senate to help fund this program, but it is difficult since the government has to decide where money should and should not be given. I read that the debate is because other birth control methods prevent the sperm and egg from meeting, but with an IUD, the sperm and egg meet and are then discarded from the body because the egg is not able to implant into the uterine walls. The article also points out, however, that the number of live abortions has reduced drastically. Since there is the argument that IUDs can be associated with abortion, many people oppose funding from the government.

                   This article is much different that the other articles that I chose to research. I was discussing this article just a bit with my instructor toward the beginning of this project and she pointed that the number of people to associate IUDs with abortions is a small number. I agree with her. There are definitely people that have the belief that an IUD could be compared to an abortion, but is this realistic? The fertilized egg has never actually implanted within the uterine walls with an IUD whereas the fetus is being removed from the uterus with an abortion. The other articles that I have explored show the pros and cons to funding IUDs, rather than attacking the device specifically. It has an interesting angle that gives me new perspective, but that doesn't mean that I would agree with the details held within.
                
                 I have mixed feelings about the view that this article shares. I will be the first to admit that it has always bothered me a bit that the sperm and egg do meet, but does this mean that there is conception if the egg has not implanted. What defines the beginning of life? There are different opinions about this. I used to believe that life begins when the sperm and egg meet, but does life actually begin if the egg has not implanted so that it can grow into a human being? The article discusses that the number of abortions was down by 34% in teens. This is a drastic number to look at. I see this as a good thing, not a negative thing. Many women are depending on the use of IUDs for long term birth control, especially since there are non-hormonal options available as well. How is this program supposed to continue to be able to provide women with free or reduced IUDs if they are being associated with birth control, which in turn prevents government funding? Has there been significant scientific investigation done to decide when exactly a human life begins? There are still cases in which fetuses that are killed within the womb, even at 39 weeks, end in no conviction because the fetus has not yet become a “person.” There is a lot to think about when trying to end a significant form of birth control from being funded by the government.