Cancer and the church
The August 14 Sydney Daily Telegraph reported that Professor James Drife, vice-president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in Britain, had stated: "Concerns have been raised about the possible link between abortion and breast cancer. There is inconclusive research in this area but one analysis has indicated a possible increase in risk."
The spectre of a link between abortion and breast cancer has been raised many times in the mass media and has been used by the religious right as supposed proof of the "dangers" of abortion.
A causal relationship between abortion and breast cancer has not been proven, but even if it was, for many women it would make little difference to the choice they'd make after considering the options.
Termination of a pregnancy is not a decision that women take lightly (although for many women it is not always the big moral dilemma it is made out to be). Rarely is abortion used as the preferred method of contraception.
It is important for women contemplating any medical procedure to know all the risks involved. The more information available, the more control a person has over their body.
On August 19, an article on the contraceptive pill appeared in the Good Weekend magazine. It described how John Rock, an ardent Catholic and one of the developers of the pill, was very keen to obtain his church's approval of the pill. (This was despite vilification by the some in the church; he was called a "moral rapist" by a Catholic monsignor at the time.)
In 1951, Pope Pius XII had approved the "rhythm method" of contraception for Catholics because it was a "natural method of regulating procreation, which didn't involve frustration of the body's normal processes". Seven years later, the pope approved the use of the pill as a remedy for conditions such as painful periods.
Rock wanted the papal nod for the pill to be used for contraception and to that end was instrumental in the pill being administered so as to mimic the body's "normal processes". Thus the pill is taken in a four-week cycle: for three weeks, active contraceptive pills are taken, followed by one week in which placebo pills are taken so that menstruation will occur.
While Rock's attempts to gain the Vatican's acceptance of the pill were dashed in 1968 when Pope Paul VI declared that all "artificial" methods of contraception are against the teachings of the church, the pill continues to be administered in line with this "natural" rhythm.
Medically, there is no reason for this frequency of menstruation. Gynaecologists I have spoken to have confirmed that the one-week break from active pills is to enable women to feel "like normal women". Despite the premenstrual and menstrual symptoms, ranging from discomfort to agony, the relatively safe method of continuous pill taking remains under-publicised.
The Good Weekend article indicated that studies in Japan suggest that the incidence of breast, uterine and other cancers may be linked to the number of menstrual periods a women has in her lifetime, and that the interruption of the menstrual cycle by continuous taking of the pill may be beneficial.
Given the power of the church over decisions affecting women (most recently exercised in the government's attempts to ban single women and lesbians from accessing IVF services), it is not surprising that the possibility of a link between abortion and cancer is the one that hits the headlines, rather than the possibility that the contraceptive pill can also act as an anti-cancer agent.
But then, who knows how many other scientific and medical discoveries have been thwarted by churches that are dominated by conservative men who believe that they know what is best for women and their bodies.
BY MARGARET ALLUM