Is Plan B an Abortifacient?

Austriaco, Nicanor Pier Giorgio

doi:10.5840/ncbq2007746

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, I am skeptical of the potential for resolving Plan B's mechanism without appealing to some conception of justice because of how entangled values are in assessments of facts. Since the 2000s, disagreement about the mechanism of Plan B has decreased, as some zygote-centrists have come to reject its postfertilization potential (see Reznik 2010), such as biologist and Catholic priest Nicanor Austriaco and Catholic nun Patricia Talone (Austriaco 2007; Talone 2010). Crucially, this shift has been ethical and epistemic: partly because of increased concern for the rights of rape survivors (Holbrook 2010; Talone 2010) and because of innovative methods for assessing mechanisms more precisely (Lalitkumar et al 2007; Gemzell-Danielsson, Berger, and Lalitkumar 2013).…”

Section: Exclude Zygote-centric Values: Don't Protect Refusals By Pro...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Imposing Values and Enforcing Gender through Knowledge: Epistemic Oppression with the Morning-after Pill's Drug Label

ChoGlueck

2022

Hypatia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among feminist philosophers, there are two lines of argument that sexist values are illegitimate in science, focusing on epistemic or ethical problems. This article supports a third framework, elucidating how value-laden science can enable epistemic oppression. My analysis demonstrates how purported knowledge laden with sexist values can compromise epistemic autonomy and contribute to paternalism and misogyny. I exemplify these epistemic wrongs with a case study of the morning-after pill (emergency contraception) during its 2006 switch to over-the-counter availability and its new drug label from the US Food and Drug Administration that it “may prevent implantation.” Antiabortion science advisers created this label to protect zygotes based on debated value judgments that were later concealed. This zygote-centric knowledge enabled them to shape potential users by instructing “good mothers” that they ought to protect zygotes and punishing “bad mothers” by refusing their requests for the drug. Therefore, I argue that the sexist values and gender norms of antiabortionists that prioritize zygotic health are illegitimate in this context because they cause epistemic injustices and perpetuate epistemic oppression. Furthermore, I advocate against blanket protections for the “right to conscience” and “religious freedom” of healthcare providers because they reinforce the epistemic oppression of women, especially those on the margins. Content Warning: This article discusses sexual assault and refusals to provide contraception to patients, including survivors.

show abstract

Section: Exclude Zygote-centric Values: Don't Protect Refusals By Pro...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Imposing Values and Enforcing Gender through Knowledge: Epistemic Oppression with the Morning-after Pill's Drug Label

ChoGlueck

2022

Hypatia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the antiabortion standard of proof is arguably not falsifiable scientifically with empirical testing, so their version of a post-fertilization hypothesis is a "politics of doubt" based on mere possibility rather than empirically confirmed possibility (p. 1775) [10]. Additionally, there are increasingly more (anti-abortion) Catholic bioethicists who support the scientific consensus and recognize the moral importance of EC availability for survivors of sexual assault [22,23].…”

Section: Argument 1: Lack Of Scientific Support For Post-fertilizatio...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The FDA ought to change Plan B's label

ChoGlueck

2022

Contraception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While unsuccessful in Chile, ICMER's work promoted further study that confirmed their findings (e.g., Lalitkumar et al 2007). The empirical uncertainty of this pill's mechanism seems to have lessened over time, particularly as some antiabortionists have come to reject a post-fertilization effect (e.g., Austriaco 2007). However, the controversy remains unresolved in much of North and South America, with a powerful minority of anti-abortionists continuing to assert the possibility of a post-fertilization effect based on different standards of evidence (e.g., Kahlenborn et al 2015).…”

Section: A Political Instrument For/against Access and Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Broadening the scope of our understanding of mechanisms: lessons from the history of the morning-after pill

ChoGlueck

2019

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Philosophers of science and medicine now aspire to provide useful, socially relevant accounts of mechanism. Existing accounts have forged the path by attending to mechanisms in historical context, scientific practice, the special sciences, and policy. Yet, their primary focus has been on more proximate issues related to therapeutic effectiveness. To take the next step toward social relevance, we must investigate the challenges facing researchers, clinicians, and policy makers involving values and social context. Accordingly, we learn valuable lessons about the connections between mechanistic processes and more fundamental reasons for (or against) medical interventions, particularly moral, ethical, religious, and political concerns about health, agency, and power. This paper uses debates over the controversial morning-after pill (emergency contraception) to gain insight into the deeper reasons for the production and use of mechanistic knowledge throughout biomedical research, clinical practice, and governmental regulation. To practice socially relevant philosophy of science, I argue that we need to account for mechanistic knowledge beyond immediate effectiveness, such as how it can also provide moral guidance, aid ethical categorization in the clinic, and function as a political instrument. Such insights have implications for medical epistemology, including the value-laden dimensions of mechanistic reasoning and the "epistemic friction" of values. Furthermore, there are broader impacts for teaching research ethics and understanding the role of science advisors as political advocates.

show abstract

Is Plan B an Abortifacient?

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Imposing Values and Enforcing Gender through Knowledge: Epistemic Oppression with the Morning-after Pill's Drug Label

Imposing Values and Enforcing Gender through Knowledge: Epistemic Oppression with the Morning-after Pill's Drug Label

The FDA ought to change Plan B's label

Broadening the scope of our understanding of mechanisms: lessons from the history of the morning-after pill

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About