Perplexed by the Pill

The Pill turned 50 this year, and Time magazine commemorated the anniversary last week with Nancy Gibbs's cover story, "Love, Sex, Freedom and the Paradox of the Pill." Gibbs thoroughly and thoughtfully provides a scientific and sociological history of birth control, while addressing some of the ethical questions raised by the little tablet, swallowed by more than 100 million women worldwide every day. Gibbs sets up a strong contrast in how people respond to the Pill: "Its supporters hoped it would strengthen marriage by easing the strain of unwanted children; its critics still charge that the Pill gave rise to promiscuity, adultery, and the breakdown of the family."

As a Christian who has taken the Pill intermittently for over a decade, I find myself on both sides of the divide, caught between an ethic of hospitality and of stewardship, between individual responsibility and collective consciousness, between traditional family values and feminist theory. Reading Gibbs's article didn't answer all my questions, but it forced me to admit that the questions needed asking.

A year or so into our marriage, my husband, Peter, and I went away for a weekend. In the middle of an expensive dinner—both of us content with the "just us"-ness of our lives—I said to him, "Do you ever think about never having kids?"

"All the time," he replied.

We were young. We hadn't had sex before marriage. I wouldn't have called it entitlement then, but in retrospect I admit that I felt entitled to "my" life with "my" husband. Kids were an afterthought, something that might come, someday, if we felt like it, and if a convenient time arose.

We both eventually changed our minds. We realized that kids are never convenient. More, I wanted to see Peter ...

 You have reached the end of this Article Preview

To continue reading, subscribe now. Subscribers have full digital access.

Log inSubscribe

Already a CT subscriber? Log in for full digital access.