Have never taken MAP before (am 36!) is it like termination?

[PonderingTheMatter]

I really deliberated before posting this as I truly don't want to offend anyone who has had to take MAP.

I've had to name change as I'm so embarrassed that a 36 year old is asking this.

I've never taken emergency contraception before, just luckily haven't been in the situation where I would need it.

Anyway I've 2 under 2 with the youngest 5 months. First time dtd last night since baby and had a contraception failure.

Oh shit

Dh wants me to get MAP but out of nowhere I'm having worries. In the small chance that I'm pregnant, is MAP like a terminaton?

I don't really want a third child, we definitely can't afford it but I wouldn't harm one either.

I must sound so ignorant, I'm sorry.

Please someone reassure me that it's ok to take.

I hope I don't upset anyone by asking this q.

[sebsmummy1]

I think the morning after pill prevents the egg from being able to implant. So it's not like a termination no.

[KittyandTeal]

No it's not like a termination, it simply changes your hormone balance to stop the egg implanting. That's why it has a time frame to take it in.

Almost exactly the same thing happened to us after my dd1, I took map

[PacificDogwood]

No, it's nothing like a termination.

Unless you want to risk the possibility of a pregnancy, please take it - the sooner, the more effective it is.
If you have not bled within the next 3 weeks, take a pregnancy test - there is a failure rate.

Don't beat yourself up

[SweetPeaSoup]

As I understand it, you have to take it quickly so that it stops the egg from implanting - it will just carry on through your body as usual. That's if it even gets fertilised anyway :)

[cleanmyhouse]

No, its not like a termination. It just fills you up with hormones, stops the egg implanting and can bring your period on early.

If you're at a paticularly fertile time of the month, you night want to consider an emergency coil. I've had a MAP fail before.

[MaidOfStars]

Are you concerned ethically or physically?

Ethically, at 'worst', it's most similar to a coil. If you have ovulated and the egg has been fertilised, it won't be able to implant. How do you feel about the coil? Other things it can do to prevent pregnancy is stop ovulation and stop any egg being fertilised, but I can't see any obvious ethical issues with either of those mechanisms (unless you're hardcore Catholic, maybe).

Physically, it varies. For me, I got a reasonably heavy period. You might get all the normal hormonal changes associated with periods - moods, sore boobs, cramps, etc. Nausea is quite common but I've never been affected in that way.

[SueBigFatSue]

It's taken to prevent fertilisation. It doesn't work if you're already pregnant.

[Patapouf]

Think of it as a super dose of the normal contraceptive pill, it doesn't terminate an existing pregnancy, it prevents one.

[DinoSnores]

I was going to say the same as MaidOfStars. Is it the ethical issues you are struggling with?

The MAP prevents implantation of a fertilised egg by stripping the lining (like a period) that the fertilised egg would burrow into.

I believe life begins at conception so wouldn't take it.

Others believe that implantation is a good starting point as many fertilised eggs do not implant and result in pregnancy normally (potentially in 50% of cycles of regular unprotected sex) and the MAP would prevent that implantation.

If you are already pregnant and implantation has already occurred, the MAP will not cause a termination.

(As an aside, as your baby is less than 6 months, if your periods haven't returned yet and you are exclusively breastfeeding, that will also have a contraceptive effect. I wouldn't rely on it if you definitely don't want another child but just mentioned it as it might reassure you a little (whether or not you go for the MAP) that the chances of pregnancy resulting from last night might be small. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactational_amenorrhea)

[flora717]

I took it twice (in younger days). I found the hormones a rough ride (but ditto the pill for me).
Although the chances of a pregnancy are reduced if you really can't have a baby now I think MAP is better than 2 weeks of restless nights.

[loveareadingthanks]

It's nothing like a termination.

For a start, you don't even know if there's a fertilised egg. There probably isn't. But sensible to do something in case.

It basically stops any eggs implanting so your eggs just leave you in the normal way. Whether fertilised or not. And as someone else said, this happens with a lot of fertilised eggs anyway.

If you are actually pregnant - egg implanted - then it won't end the pregnancy and there is no evidence of any damage to the baby with Levonelle (the one you take within 72 hours).

[UnclearBlue]

Some inaccurate information on here! There is no evidence that the MAP prevents implantation. It is basically the same as a massive dose of the normal pill - the idea is that you flood your system with hormones to put the ovaries to sleep straight away (rather than the week you normally have to wait for with the pill) so that they don't release an egg. It prevents ovulation. It has a failure rate, which is caused by if the person already ovulated, it can do fuck all to help.

The stuff about preventing implantation is total balls put about by right wing religious folks in America who don't believe in birth control. Not science.

[Grantaire]

"Levonelle one step tablets contain the active ingredient levonorgestrel, which is a synthetic derivative of the naturally occurring female sex hormone, progesterone.

It is not fully understood how this medicine prevents pregnancy. It is thought to work by preventing ovulation and fertilisation and also by altering the lining of the womb, depending on which stage of the menstrual cycle the woman is at.

In a woman's normal menstrual cycle, an egg matures and is released from the ovaries (ovulation). The ovary then produces progesterone, which prevents the release of further eggs. Levonorgestrel, tricks the body processes into thinking that ovulation has already occurred, as it provides high levels of synthetic progesterone. This prevents the release of eggs from the ovaries.

Levonorgestrel also increases the thickness of the natural mucus at the neck of the womb (cervix), making it more difficult for sperm to cross from the vagina into the womb. By preventing sperm entering the womb, successful fertilisation of any egg that is there is less likely.

Levonorgestrel is also thought to alter the lining of the womb, preventing it from being prepared for a fertilised egg. This means that if an egg is released from the ovaries and is fertilised, it cannot implant into the womb and therefore pregnancy is avoided."

[Grantaire]

That isn't right wing religious stuff btw. That's actual published information on how we think the MAP works. We don't actually know. It primarily prevents ovulation but they do also believe it makes conception and implantation more difficult.

[bumbleymummy]

Was just about to come on and post the same as Grantaire. It basically prevents fertilisation from occurring by a few different mechanisms - inhibiting/delaying ovulation, increasing mucus production etc. So no, not an abortion. Do take it as soon as you can though - within 24 hours is best.

[imwithspud]

No it's nothing like a termination, you have to actually be pregnant to have a termination and as far as I'm aware it would be pretty much impossible to be pregnant in the 72 hours you have to take the MAP. The idea of it is that it prevents a pregnancy from happening rather than ending one. Me and oh had a contraception failure years ago soon after we'd gotten together, no way were we in a position to start a family after only being together a couple of weeks so the next morning I went and got the MAP. All that happened was that I got a period a week later even though I wasn't due on for another 2/3 weeks or so. Not sure if it's the same for everyone.

[littlejohnnydory]

It can prevent implantation of a fertilised embryo, as others have said. So can quite a few methods of contraception - the mini pill, injection, implant and coil. If you are someone who avoids those contraceptives for that reason, MAP wouldn't be acceptable to you either.

[cluecu]

As others have said re fertilised embryo....depends on your point of view.

5 years ago the MAP would have been my saviour against a potential life wrecker...now it would be unthinkable to harm anything that advanced.

[MaidOfStars]

now it would be unthinkable to harm anything that advanced
80 cells. Really?

[Tonberry]

Advanced? It's a handful of cells with no sentience and that's regardless of whether it's fertilised or not.

[Tonberry]

OP, you have three options here.

1. Take the MAP and the sooner the better as effectiveness declines with time. It is not an abortifacient, it is a preventative although it does have a failure rate of 5% if taken within 24 hours and up to 42% if taken at 72hrs.
   

1. Get a coil fitted. This can be used as a form of emergency contraception within five days and has a failure rate of just 1%.
   

1. Cross your fingers and hope for the best. The chances of conceiving on any given 'go' are around about 15-25% depending on various factors.
   

The thing to ask yourself is, do you want another child right now? If the answer is no, are you prepared to risk the fact that this contraception failure could result in pregnancy?

[cluecu]

Advanced to me, yes because I'm trying to get pregnant and anything remotely resembling some kind of egg/sperm fusion is advanced. That's purely my perspective though and that's what I was trying to say; different people will interpret the MAP effect in different ways, I'm a good example of having done so at various times in my life.

[imwithspud]

Obviously If you're trying to get pregnant then taking the MAP wouldn't even cross your mind. I think that's pretty much a given.

[cluecu]

No it wouldn't now but in the past, when I didn't want to be pregnant, it is something I have taken. I was trying to be honest with the OP...when I was 25 and in a different part of my life, the MAP was a preventive method against pregnancy. Now that my perspective has changed, it isn't quite the same to me.

[Tonberry]

That's your perspective though, coming from a place where you actually want a child. The OP has two under the age of two, the youngest is only five months, and is not TTC.