The legal status of emergency contraception

Emergency contraception (EC), an intervention within 72 h of unprotected in tercourse, dates back approximately 30 years, to the Yuzpe method. Recent d evelopment of a second generation of 'morning after,' better called 'emerge ncy' contraceptives, has raised claims that they are abortifacient. These c laims are largely rejected in medical, legal and much religious reasoning. Pregnancy is usually ascribed to the postimplantation period; means to prev ent completion of implantation do not terminate pregnancy. An alternative a ttack on EC has arisen under South American laws that protect human life 'f rom conception.' The chance of conception from a single act of unprotected intercourse is very low, in view of limited times of fertility during menst rual cycles. The protection of a woman's life is not suspended during pregn ancy. Risks to women's interests are more credible than the chance of conce ption having occurred. The claim to prohibit EC to protect embryonic life f rom conception is therefore problematic. (C) 2001 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. All rights reserved.