Judge Orders Morning-After Pill Available for All Ages

I am not sure how I feel about this. There are pros and cons:

A federal judge ruled Friday that the government must make the most common morning-after pill available over the counter for all ages, instead of requiring a prescription for girls 16 and younger. In his ruling, he also accused the federal government of “bad faith” in dealing with the requests to make the pill universally available.

I guess on the plus side teenaged girls who are sexually active would have another weapon in their arsenal of pregnancy prevention methods, but on the other hand it places a lot of adult responsibility on children rather than parents. I'm also afraid that it might encourage more girls under the age of 16 to have sex more freely if they know that they can get the "morning after" pill without parental consent.

Personally I don't think that the "morning after" pill should be used as a primary method of birth control but I am an adult and think like one, whereas a child under the age of 16 might think that it is perfectly alright to use this method on a regular basis without thinking about the long term effects on the body from overuse.

LINK to story

I'm interested to hear what some of you think of this decision as I'm not sure how I feel about it!

When has unwanted pregnancy ever deterred people from satisfying their sexual urges?
I think this move is a good one. It'll prevent more unwanted pregnancy, and teen sex won't suddenly jump sky-high.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, the immediate effects of the morning-after pill aren't particularly pleasant in terms of side effects. Overuse won't be any more abundant than it is among people who are over the age of 18.

reply to post by EllaMarina
A question, if you don't mind me asking: Do you think that this decision might lead to more under aged girls using the morning after pill rather than relying on condoms? My kids are grown, but if they were still young teens I think I would prefer them to use a combination of birth control pills in addition to using condoms so as to protect against pregnancy and STDs at the same time (which they did- I had no illusions about kids having sex much sooner than they should). I wonder if this will lead to less condom use and more STDs or if it would mostly just lead to girls using the morning after pill who had previously used no kind of protection at all. What are your thoughts on this?

Okay, great for the morning after pill. Why not make birth control pill OTC so those who want it, can have it and those who don't...well, don't? I don't see much reason to go to the doc so they can give you a script for the BC pill. Although, I suppose that there are a few of them out there with bad side effects, so pros and cons there as well.

Originally posted by Skada
Okay, great for the morning after pill. Why not make birth control pill OTC so those who want it, can have it and those who don't...well, don't? I don't see much reason to go to the doc so they can give you a script for the BC pill. Although, I suppose that there are a few of them out there with bad side effects, so pros and cons there as well.

I would much rather young girls take birth control pills than the morning after pill, but dispensing them without prescription would be dangerous. There are many side effects that can come with birth control pill use, and family history is an important consideration as well. I suffered what is called a "mini stroke" in my early 20s due to birth control pills and had to get off of them immediately. Also in order to be prescribed the pill you have to go for an annual pap smear which is necessary in early detection of many medical problems including cervical cancer, endemitriosis, HPV, STDs, breast cancer, etc.

reply to post by littled16

Thank you for clearing that up.

I suppose if we really look at it from Prescription and Over-The-Counter, no pill, and I mean every Pharma Pill out there, should not be OTC. But that is just me, but since there are OTC, there should be a Birth Control pill that is safe (not sure how they would do this), cheap (I know Big Pharma does not "do" "Cheap") and effective (but everyone's hormones are different, so there is no magic pill).

I don't know if I like the idea.
Kids will end up having sex, but is not having to worry about the long term going to cause more damage. Babies are not the only consequences of unprotected sex. Will this contribute to the rise of STDs among an even younger crowd?
I can't help but wonder if removing the idea of long term consequences may also encourage young people to not think their decisions through a little better. We are already seeing the fruits of instant self gratification in our society, will this just add to the problem?
No, I think that a child under the age of 16 should have to worry about the disapproval of their parents and doctors in this case. This may prevent a few pregnancies but how many lives can be ruined?

reply to post by littled16


If it ends up being cheaper than condoms...expect to see a sharp rise in STDs. I have concerns on both sides of the isle with his rush to judgement.

This also ties in neatly with Planned Parenthood being a primary voice in Obamacare. With this ruling, I see the after morning pill being soon passed out like M&Ms through their agency.

Des

reply to post by woodsmom
I also worry that this might contribute to the already steady rise in STDs among young people. I also think it would be better if girls under 16 sought the morning after pill that parents should be informed so that they can make the choice whether to put their sexually active child on regular birth control or not. I can also see a plus side to this though: young girls who are not using ANY form of birth control would at least have the option available to them. I guess if you found out your 13 or 14 year old was sexually active it would be better to hear that they had taken the morning after pill than to find out your young child is pregnant. I'm just torn on the issue.

Thanks for your thoughts on this woodsmom- I always appreciate your perspective!

reply to post by Destinyone
I know that the morning after pill has been around in Europe many, many more years than it has been available in the US and has been used safely and effectively, but I can't help but wonder about what the long term effects would be on a young girl who uses it as her primary method of birth control- and you know that a lot of young girls are naive enough to think that it would be an acceptable idea. I can see the family planning clinics setting baskets of them on the counter for the taking in the same fashion they already do with condoms with signs that say "Take some...FREE". The increased risk of STDs bothers me as well as they are on the rise among young people and mutating into drug resistant nastiness!

Thanks for your input Des!

reply to post by littled16


The thought of a 13-14 year old walking through the door to tell you they are going to be a parent would be devastating. I honestly could not imagine, I do see that one point. Especially since they themselves have a life to live before they create another. I do think parents should be kept in the loop though, making it prescription keeps it available for those oops moments, it would simply force the child to bring the issues to light rather than hiding their activities and making it a habitual fix.


Ps on an unrelated note, I wish you could have seen the dance the 2 yr old performed to match your kittie's dance on your last avi, it was priceless.

Originally posted by woodsmom
reply to post by littled16

 

Ps on an unrelated note, I wish you could have seen the dance the 2 yr old performed to match your kittie's dance on your last avi, it was priceless.

That's my boy!!!! Tell him granny is proud of his kitty dance!!!

reply to post by littled16


I doubt it will be cheaper than condoms. Besides, statistics related to increased availability to contraception has been surprisingly positive in the past.

Anyway, better a freely available morning after pill than parental-permission abortion. I say that because I've read terrifying stories of pro-life parents denying their young daughters an escape from a pregnancy that might end up fatally harming them or ruining their still-developing lives.

Has it officially been suggested that the pill would be harmful if taken as a regular form of birth control?

reply to post by EllaMarina
Indeed, I brought it up somewhere above to Skada. I had to be taken off the pill in my 20s after having a "mini stroke". Now I'm going through menopause without benefit of hormone replacement therapy because I am one of the ones whose body doesn't react well with taking hormones. My eldest daughter also can no longer take hormones so has opted for an IUD. The pill is definitely NOT for everyone!

Thanks for taking time out to give feedback EllaMarina- much appreciated!