When women don’t want to conceive a child, many consider long-term birth control such as an intrauterine device, which can prevent pregnancy for up to 12 years, or a tubal ligation, a permanent procedure that blocks the fallopian tubes. But not every doctor is on board with those options. Why do some refuse to provide those methods of contraception?
In some cases, the justification is medical: A current pregnancy, significant risks from the anesthesia needed for a tubal ligation, or a uterine abnormality that might make inserting an IUD dangerous. However, says Jen Gunter, a San Francisco area OB/GYN, “there are really very few medical reasons a woman can’t have an IUD.”
But some providers refuse to insert IUDs because of misconceptions about their safety and function, especially in women who have not had children. A 2012 survey of medical providers found that 30 percent mistakenly thought the devices are not safe for women without children. And many seem particularly reluctant to insert IUDs in adolescents. (Current practice guidelines say that adolescents and women who have not had children are candidates for IUD insertion.)
Another survey conducted in 2014 found that among the 4 percent of providers who didn’t perform any IUD insertions in the past year, almost a quarter were concerned that the IUDs are a method of abortion. (They aren’t, according to the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Although IUDs can prevent an egg from being fertilized, they cannot disrupt the implantation of a fertilized egg.) Compared with condom use, which fails 18 percent of the time, IUDs fail as little as 0.2 percent of the time. Contraceptive pills — the most popular form of birth control — involve putting hormones in your body; they fail about 9 percent of the time, in some cases because women don’t take the pill when they are supposed to do so.