Women's Groups Pressure FDA on 'Morning-After' Pill

2 popular 'otc' drugs ( drugs with the literal meaning applied ) are Alcohol and tobacco. They both have limits on age.
Why can this drug not fall into that context if for nothing else other then safety?
I agree with the arguement that the parents NEED TO KNOW. No if's and's or butt's about that.
The problem i see , if this were allowed, are the parents who still turn a blind eye to thier child when they do something they dont agree with. Religious factors may play into a parents decision of allowing thier child the right to these pills . Denial can also be blinding as some parents will look to punish thier child for thier ' wrong doings' instead of fix it.
Then you have an entire fleet of other problems facing the situation.

0 Replies

DrewDad

Quote:

But by all means, lets not tell them how to prevent a pregnancy. Then get in arguments about whether they should be allowed to terminate a pregnancy.

Agreed, someone should explain that to the brain in the oval office. He believes in stressing and promoting abstinence only. This is another instance where he, they, it believes that teaching prevention leads to promiscuity

0 Replies

MNAP is available over the counter in the UK, for a small charge - free in some establishments. Of course I'm in favour of it...but we still have the highest teenage pregnancy rates in Europe!

0 Replies

Approving this drug will not promote promiscuity. Nor will it entice teenagers to have more sex. Hormones do that well enough.

The problem with all of this not does not lie with the FDA. Approve it or not, people have to stop hiding from the fact that sex is out there and if you don't educate your teenager about it, someone else will. And we all know how reliable other teenagers are. Rolling Eyes

I personally do not feel that taking this drug is the moral (right) thing to do. But I also don't think it's my place to tell some woman she can't do what she wishes with her own body. If this pill isn't made available, the "back door" abortion rate will continue to climb.

0 Replies

That's quite a statement, considering the MAP hasn't been available that long. Do you have some stats to back that up?

0 Replies

Various forms of the morning after pill have been around for at least 30 years. I recall a friend of mine in university taking them in about 1977. Condom broke. She wanted to be sure there was no chance of pregnancy. Smart woman.

Hand over the dang pill to whoever needs it.

0 Replies

As far as I can see, the morning after pill is not lethal--unlike the fabled coathanger or various "perfectly natural herbal remedies.

I'm not at all convinced that the physical discomfort of after-the-fact- contraception would require an emergency room.

If the Emergency Room would be necessary, a hypothetical daughter should be capable of explaining to the ER staff just why she might be having these alarming symptoms.

0 Replies

or be pregnant by the physically abusive father. Some folks' world seems rather thin and tunnelled, re some adolescents' needs.

edit to move apostrophe

0 Replies

Occobuco--

I'm not sure that you meant "tunnelled" but you certainly happened on a powerful, evocative word.

I'm impressed.

0 Replies

I did mean it. I happen to have real physical tunnel vision, so am pretty familiar with the content/context.

0 Replies

Osso--

Art and Poetry. Wow!

0 Replies

Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:

Thanks Phoenix.
I'm curious whether the issue you have raised would be treated differently from state to state due to possible age of consent issues re definition of "minor" age.

Anyhow, here's a challenge for you - like me, I know you like to to be resourceful and check out references, etc. Let's see what you can find on this one? :wink:

How's your reference research going, Phoenix?

0 Replies

Quote:

or be pregnant by the physically abusive father. Some folks' world seems rather thin and tunnelled, re some adolescents' needs.

That is an entirely different issue, and it is silly to make policy for all based on the exception. All states, as far as I know, have provisions for abuse situations that fall outside the normal procedure.

0 Replies

Idaho wrote:

Quote:
or be pregnant by the physically abusive father. Some folks' world seems rather thin and tunnelled, re some adolescents' needs.

That is an entirely different issue, and it is silly to make policy for all based on the exception....

Don't be absurd. Murder is the exception, not the rule, and yet we have laws about it.

Most drunk drivers arrive safely at their destination, yet we have laws about it.

Most homes are built safely, yet we have building codes and inspections.

0 Replies

Bib- You are really pushing!

This is a lousy reference, but so far, it is the only site that I have found so far that has the ages of majority all in one place:

http://www.tangledmoon.org/majorityage.htm

0 Replies

I'm not saying don't have laws - I think you misunderstood, or I wasn't clear enough. We have laws that say, "If you do this (misdead), the consequenses are . . ." That is different from saying, "Some people are diabetic and need insulin so we will give it to everybody." Or, as in this case, "Some girls are pregnant by their sick fathers, so we will allow all girls to have OTC MAP just in case."

0 Replies

Idaho wrote:

Quote:
or be pregnant by the physically abusive father. Some folks' world seems rather thin and tunnelled, re some adolescents' needs.

That is an entirely different issue, and it is silly to make policy for all based on the exception. All states, as far as I know, have provisions for abuse situations that fall outside the normal procedure.

When I said that it was a followup to this quote from DrewDad, whom I agree with.
"I'd much rather they have access to the morning-after pill than try to hide a pregnancy from a physically abusive father. "

I have no problems with a morning after pill being available over the counter, or through the pharmacy sans prescription, to whomever needs it.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

candidone1 wrote:
Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:
candidone1 wrote:
It is the equivalent of taking one week's worth of birth control pills at one, if I remember correctly in terms of effects.

Really? Is there any medical citations for this?

No..I can't back that up with anything just yet. This was old information that I had been given through an MD here in Canada a few years back.
The pill has been available for a few years, and I just remember hearing that it was just a turbo-charged birth control pill...and it really f*cked up whoever took it.
Obviously.

I'll try to get back with something more concrete.
But I can't back up what I said with a link...it's just what I vaguely remember.

My recollection is that while it can cause some discomfort from the influx of hormones, it would be a stretch to say it "f*cked up" everyone who took it.

I guess when a friend of mine had to take one when she was in high school and the doc. overseeing her warned her of the side effects, coupled with the actual side effects she experienced, I would say that she was f*cked up. Perhaps it was a generalization, perhaps the pill itself has evolved over the past decade in quality and quantity of hormone, but nevertheless, it was an experience that surely deterred her from ever considering it as a practical, readily available form of birth control.
My point was simply that the MAP was so discomforting and created in the female, such side effects, and a massive hormonal imbalance, that it hardly classified as an enticing means of birth control.

0 Replies

candidone1
Sounds like a little fear mongering on your part. The pill has been used and it been adjudged safe by all. Including the FDA. Their objection is based on morality. Our government has been captured by the religious right who would impose their values upon us all. Whatever happened to religious freedom?

0 Replies

It's not supposed to be an enticing method... just an 'in case of emergency' method.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Women's Groups Pressure FDA on 'Morning-After' Pill

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know