Responses

PDF

Embracing post-fertilisation methods of family planning: a call to action
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Comment on 'Embracing post-fertilisation methods of family planning: a call to action': authors' response
    • Elizabeth G Raymond, Senior Medical Associate
    • Other Contributors:
      • James Trussell and Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson

    Dr Gordon is uncomfortable with a family planning method that exerts its effect after fertilisation.[1] However, a new study, published after our personal view article was already in press, suggests that many women feel differently.

    This study surveyed 1137 women from randomly selected households in five European countries in 2008.[2] Overall, 41% of the respondents said they would consider using a method that...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Comment on 'Embracing post-fertilisation methods of family planning: a call to action'

    While acknowledging that the article 'Embracing post-fertilisation methods of family planning: a call to action' [1] is a personal view, the authors appear to assume that readers of the Journal will agree and be motivated to promote such methods. I would like to voice the view that I and many others would find this unethical. This is a price too high to pay to in our desire to help prevent unplanned pregnancies.

    ...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.