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.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

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.