Everyone seems to have posted parts of their senior research paper here, and I want in. It may seem like an odd topic, but I think it's important. Sooo, in case you're interested..... Perspectives in Perspective: Emergency Contraception In a society plagued by indecision, the outstanding issue of what is right or wrong regarding women’s rights to birth control has become an outright battle. As the ever-prevalent outcries echo in support of one side’s viewpoint or another’s, an increasingly uninformed American public has brought to the table the superfluous matters of religion and moral standards that have and will likely always complicate what is, in essence, a very simple question: How much control should women have in securing and using effective methods of contraception? Given that, according to an article in Mother Jones magazine, half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintentional (Mooney), this question can be reasonably answered, “More.” Taking precedence in the viable options for pregnancy prevention is the oral contraceptive known as emergency contraception. Said to drastically reduce the risk of pregnancy after unprotected sex (Uhlenhuth), this contraceptive has proven itself a powerful tool for preventing the spate of undesired pregnancies that occur every year, not only in the U.S., but around the world. As it would happen, however, emergency contraception has fought a hard battle to be available to anyone in need. Activists, afraid that the prophylactic promotes sexual promiscuity, have worked to keep emergency contraception prescription-only, either overlooking or ignoring the statistics and the overall best interests of women as a whole. Because it has prevented millions of pregnancies worldwide, emergency contraception should be permanently available over-the-counter. While there is no disputing its usefulness, it is easy to pass off emergency contraception as a form of abortion and move forward. Some insight, however, proves otherwise.