The Contraceptive Pill as an Abortifacient?


I can attest that this piece of information IS not taught in medical school, at least not mine. It is also not common knowledge amongst doctors or nurses, at least the ones I know and have discussed this with. I haven’t researched the veracity of this, but I have heard it before. If it is true, then I wish it would be taught in medical school because I believe many docs prescribe the pill not even knowing about this fact.


I have been researching this. A lot of the different pills have the package insert online for you to look up. Most sites that I have seen do admit that this is one of the ways the pill works. All of the ones I have researched so far the package insert DOES state that they are abortifacients. I agree this information needs to be out there more.

The list of side effects also needs to be better known. The women in my family have a high history of blood clots, which is one of the side effects of the pill. This is one of many reasons why I strongly object to schools just handing out the pill like candy. The pill is a prescription drug and should be treated like such. It should not be treated like candy!

Unfortunately many people, doctors included, do support abortion in one form or another. It’s a sad world we live in. :frowning:


Yes, this is true.

There are a number of books/booklets written by doctors who have studied the phenomenon. Since you are medically trained, I suggest you go to and get the references on this topic, especially these:

How The Pill And Other Contraceptives Work

Does The Birth Control Pill Cause Abortion

The Pill

Postfertilization Effects Of Oral Contraceptives And Their Relationship To Informed Consent

What A Woman Should Know About Contraception

The Physician’s Packet has many good resources

Also, you can find this information in the physician’s prescribing information of the pills themselves. For example, at the Yasmin website, the PI document includes the following paragraph:

Combination oral contraceptives (COCs) act by suppression of gonadotropins. Although the primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include changes in the cervical mucus (which increases the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus) and** the endometrium (which reduces the likelihood of implantation)**.


The doctors know, they just don’t bring it up. They have to read the information on the drugs they prescribe. And it IS in the physician inserts, though good luck finding it in the patient versions. I remember having to find the physician insert to see this info…

When I had an OB suggest one of the newer IUDs to me, I told him that I do not use hormonal birth control, because one of its functions is to make the lining of the uterus hostile to implantation, and since that happens AFTER conception is totally not an option for me. And also that since interfering with implantation is the PRIMARY reason for having the physical device in the uterus, that method especially was out. (This was before I got serious about charting and I did not bring up NFP in the discussion. I was struggling and discerning at the time.) He said that the main function of all hormonal birth control seems to be to thicken cervical mucus and block sperm, but that I was right about the other being a secondary function and that he could not deny the possibility that it would happen. I think he was surprised I knew so much. He couldn’t deny it, but I know he didn’t like talking about it either. I think if this information got out more widely, they would see the prescription numbers dropping, and their revenues along with them.


If and when mainstream America learns all this, as well as pill and abortion links to breast cancer, we’re going to see lots of law suits. —KCT


Umm… Right. Guys, yet another motivation to look for a Catholic lady if you want one at all.


Here is another suppressed fact:

Pill is a carcinogen - World Health Organization


Yeah, but the problem is mainstream America doesn’t seem to believe that pregnancy starts at conception. (Or at least that is what I’ve seen with the people that I talk too)

I’ve got a friend and we’ve gone round and round on it. In her mind you are only pregnant once the embryo attaches to the uterus.

Until she realizes that pregnancy starts at conception she will never accept the fact that the pill and other ABC are abortifacients.


The problem is, according to the medical definition of pregnancy, pregnancy does start at implantation. This is because the mother’s body is not aware of the embryo until the embryo successfully implants.

Therefore, according the medical definition of “abortion”, the pill cannot cause an abortion, because there is no pregnancy prior to implantation. In a medical setting, it would be inaccurate for the birth control pill literature to state that the pill could cause abortion.

I AM NOT SAYING THAT TAKING THE BIRTH CONTROL PILL IS OKAY. Killing an embryo is murder. I am just saying that the medical literature will not state that birth control pills cause abortion, because this is inaccurate given the definition of terms used by doctors.



As a nurse I can attest to how much they don’t know.:wink:

The pill can indeed act as an abortifacient. This can be verified by reading the many good sources posted here especially the package inserts themselves. The problem is, pregnancy is defined as starting at the time of implantation. Before that, medically speaking, those little human blastocysts are in ‘limbo’ so to speak. So, in medical terms when you have prevented implantation you have prevented pregnancy. And of course, no one will admit what science has proven which is that life begins at conception.

What’s most horrifying about this, is the numbers of lives lost. Can you imagine, if we could calculate how many human lives are lost due to the pills abortifacient mechanism, how staggering the number could be??? :eek: :eek:



When you look at the stats of how many Catholic women take the pill or use other methods of chemical contraceptives, you better look farther than just a Catholic lady…how about a DEVOUT Catholic lady;)

Speaking of the male perspective, how do husbands feel about letting this kind of thing take place in their wife’s body? With his children?!?!
I can’t imagine marrying a man that would be OK with it…:frowning:


Definitions are arbitrary.

The AMA actually changed this particular definition from conception to implantation precisely because of the way some of these “contraceptives” work-- the Pill and IUD specifically.

The definition used to be pregnancy began at conception. It has only changed in the last 20 years or so.


The sad thing is that even when you ask doctors directly, they deny it. I have a non-catholic friend who is opposed to abortion. She casually mentioned going back on the pill after the birth of her daughter and so I kindly gave her some facts about the pill being bad for her and that it is an abortifacient. She just said ‘wow’. A few months later she came to me and said that she asked her doctor and he told her that ‘her friend was misguided’ and the pill only stops you from ovulating. She then asked the pharmacist and got the same answer. :mad: So she started taking it and then a little voice told her to investigate further. She went on line and found out for herself and immediately stopped! :thumbsup:

I feel sad for all the women who don’t go in search of the truth for themselves.


Technically, scientists won’t say that they know the pill causes abortion, even by the old definition. This is simply because nobody has done the research experiments to say if it is so (thank God!).

But it really isn’t that hard to figure out with only a rudimentary knowledge of a woman’s cycle. Why does a woman bleed during her period? Because her body is sloughing off the extra uterine tissue that developed for the approach of ovulation. That extra tissue is crucial for implantation.

Now, why does a woman on the pill (and who skips the placebo dose) NOT get a period? Because her body never built up the uterine wall in anticipation of ovulation. Thus, if she DOES have a breakthrough ovulation and the egg is fertilized, it will not encounter a prepared uterous. Then the new child dies.


Could you do me a favor and point me to were on the WHO’s website it says this? I keep hearing this but when I go to those websites like WHO I can not find the info. Instead what I find is articles that say the pill is not or that it’s an extremely low percentage.

I have no doubt the info is out there I just can’t seem to find it. :confused:


BTW, I did find the Polycarp Research site at the bottom of that page. Thank you for that info. :thumbsup: I would just like to know if there are any other sources online that discuss this.




This “can” can be problematic. If I remember correctly, the Planned Parenthood website asserts that it is unknow whether the contraceptive pill has ever actually prevented implantation. Therefore, the number of human lives lost due to the pill’s abortifacient mechanism could, theoretically, be zero.

It can be tricky to argue with that kind of reasoning other than to say it’s NOT a risk I’m willing to take. Sadly, many women are more than willing.


Thanks. :slight_smile:


Some of the literature I recommended from OMSoul addresses this very issue.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit