The Politics of Rape: The Justice Department Omits Emergency Contraception

On January 10, 2005, women’s rights activists petitioned the Justice Department and demanded that its manual for examinations of sexual assault victims be revised to include emergency contraception (EC).

The 130-page National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations is an otherwise comprehensive guide for doctors and police who work with rape victims, but it’s omission of EC has women’s groups wondering about the Justice Department’s top priority: women’s health or partisan politics.

What is emergency contraception (EC)?

Emergency contraception, commonly called the “morning after pill," is a high dose of the same hormones found in birth control pills. When taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, EC prevents 75 to 90 percent of pregnancies. The effectiveness of EC is largely dependent on how quickly it’s taken. The longer a woman waits, the more difficult it is to prevent pregnancy, so women’s rights groups want rape victims to be consulted right away.

In most cases, EC does not cause an abortion. Like birth control pills, it prevents the egg from being fertilized in the first place. But because the drug has the potential to abort a just-fertilized egg, anti-abortion groups protest its use.

Post-rape politics

Anti-abortion groups claim that the morning-after pill is dangerous and that rape victims have no basic right to take it.

Women’s rights groups argue that EC has been proven safe and effective, is used in many other countries, and that rape victims should be encouraged to discuss EC with a doctor during the post-assault exam. Of course, the victim herself ultimately decides whether or not to take EC.

But the larger battle over reproductive rights may get in the way of that decision. Women’s rights advocates believe that politics influenced the Justice Department report, since a discussion of EC appeared in earlier drafts, but was later omitted.

Further, the Justice Department consulted a variety of physicians that consider EC essential to post-rape care. Dr. William Green, medical director of the sexual assault forensic examination team at the University of California at Davis, was shocked at the omission. Green told reporters that he and other health experts reached a consensus to include EC in the protocol, only to find that the Justice Department ignored their recommendation.

Does this mean that rape victims don’t have access to EC?

Rape victims will be given EC if they ask for it, but the new protocol does not require hospitals to offer it. Studies conducted by the University of Pennsylvania, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey have found that a large number of hospitals do not regularly offer EC to rape victims, and some hospitals even prohibit it.

The Justice Department protocol has the potential to override these policies, but without an open discussion of EC, it does nothing to promote it. However, the protocol does not override state and local procedures for rape victims, and a few states, like New York and California, include EC as an integral part of post-rape care.

But women’s rights groups say that the state laws aren’t enough, since many hospitals receive federal funds for rape examinations. With public dollars at stake, many hospitals may choose to remain silent about EC.

The philosophy behind the policy

The exclusion of EC from the Justice Department’s protocol for treating sexual assault victims may be the result of political pressure by anti-abortion groups. Many of these groups are threatened by any interference in human reproduction, even in cases of rape or incest. Although rape victims have the right to excellent care, they say, they do not have the right to interrupt a pregnancy.

Women’s rights advocates point out that rape survivors already have the right to an abortion and that greater availability of EC would actually decrease the number of abortions for rape victims. They’re outraged that the Bush administration’s anti-abortion stance may be extended to victims of rape and incest, when all women, regardless of circumstance, have the right to control their own reproduction.

What do you think?

WomenMatter is a place to discuss the issues with other women. We don’t want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue. To log onto one of our online forums, click here.

WomenMatter encourages women to educate themselves on the issues and then approach their representatives with ideas.

Even though the election is over, your voice is vital. Make sure our leaders know what’s important to you. To contact your representatives, click here.

WomenMatter is dedicated to empowering women to participate in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update this website several times a week.
• We launch after school GirlsMatter Clubs in middle and high schools to grow the next generation of politically aware women through a full curriculum and startup kit on girlsmatter.com.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.
• We provide partnerships with nonpartisan organizations that provide services to women and advocate for them.

We offer all our services free of charge without memberships or subscriptions. To help us maintain this work - not just in election years but as a continuing part of women’s lives - please make a tax deductible donation, click here.

Update Posted on: 1/19/2005