Selling the Morning After Pill Over the Counter-----

It might be funny that no women have responded to this thread, but that may just be due to the lopsided gender ratio at clutchcity.

In my opinion, this issue falls under the "mind your own damn business" category - so while I believe that this option should be easily available to whomever needs it, I also believe that it is neither my place nor my privilege to tell anyone else what they can or cannot do with their own private parts in the privacy of their own home.

And frankly, if it's an issue that doesn't involve me personally - I don't care!

So, MadMax and family may choose not to use the pill with impunity, and no one has the right to make that decision a difficult one for his family.

And, likewise, no one has a right to make the acquisition of this pill more difficult than necessary for any adult woman.

 

I have found that 100% of the cases where no intercourse takes place, 100% of those women do not become pregnant. We are not incognizant animals incapable of self control.



IMHO, this pill should only be available in situations involving rape. Same with abortion.

If you do the dance, expect that you may may wind up with a sore foot.

It's not rocket science. I think we all know where babies come from.

And your parents knew it too, and did not take a pill or use a hanger or knife to prevent the results.

 

Max has claimed in past threads that he would like to see abortion rates cut. I was referring to these past statements as opposed to something in this thread.

Besides, this IS "true birth control" as it prevents the pregnancy from even taking place (the test for pregnancy tests to see whether the egg has implanted in the uterus). Trying to claim that a fertilized egg that has not implanted is a "life" is a HUGE stretch at best.

I agree that other forms of birth control should be more widely available and that this availability would decrease abortions as well, but there are many, many people who cannot afford to just up and go to the doctor if they happen to make a mistake. Having a morning after pill readily available (I think it should be sold by pharmacists along with some basic education about the product) will allow those people to protect themselves even if they neglected to before or during their sexual encounter.

 

I agree that all birth control should be more widely available. However, the morning after pill does have a place and should be available if people need it.

 

Exactly. Just because some people would not use this does not give them the right to take that choice away from other people. If one wants to avoid getting pregnant, they should have the means available and this pill is the means.

 

Duh.

No, we are human beings who are not only capable of making mistakes, but prone to it as evidenced by the phrase "to err is human..."

Since this pill works the same way as daily pills, IUDs, birth control shots, implants, and patches, would you say you support banning these forms of birth control, too?

This is BIRTH CONTROL, people. This is NOT the abortion pill (RU-482 or whatever), it is the morning after pill to PREVENT pregnancy, not to abort an already implanted embryo. There are worlds of difference and if you can't see that then you have willfully closed your eyes. Try to see past your blind partisanship (on this issue) long enough to see that this IS birth control and is NOT abortion.

 

andy --

first of all...chill out.

second...you can call it a stretch, because you don't see it that way. that's fine. i'll call it a stretch to put arbitrary parameters around when it is or isn't a human life. my point is that, left alone, it will attach...and it will grow...and it will develop...and we know where that leads. that's as close as i can get to an absolute truth. after that, it's all grey...it's a best guess ("3 months...6 months?? when does it begin??")

i don't like arbitrary distinctions for human life. so my thought is that we have to err on the side that says it's POSSIBLY a human life. and if it's a human life then it's entitled to protections. it's entitled to life, at the very least.

yes...i want to see abortion rates cut...but you're playng semantics. abortion is the termination of a human life, in my view. it's just a more sanitary word for it. which leads me back to the analysis i just went through in this very post...and which we've gone back and forth over time and time again.

by the way...for the record, if you want to bring up what's already been posted...you're the one that said that even if you knew it was a human life, it wouldn't be worth protecting at the expense of the mother's own liberty. so we're far apart on a fundamental level in this argument. i see liberty in this argument as a sacred American "idol" that we bow down to at the expense of innocent human life. our society doesn't allow you the liberty to kill your dog...or a whooping crane...but it allows you to terminate a human life living in the womb.

 

Perhaps some folks may be getting the 'morning after pill' confused with the even more controversial RU-486. The morning after pill is like the 'regular' pill in that it is designed to prevent a fertilized egg from implanting. The 'regular' pill may also prevent conception from ever taking place in addition to preventing the implantation of the egg.

The RU-486 pill is the one that will terminate an existing pregnancy well (months) after the fact. The morning after pill won't.

Regardless, I don't agree that it be made available OTC. It is just one more step in diminishing the act that may produce a human life. I think it will promote teeange sex even more as they would have this fallback plan. You can't use the rape argument, because anyone raped would have the opportunity to obtain this pill at the hospital when they are examined.

 

By that logic you would ban all forms of birth control.

 

I am against all methods of artificial birth control.

Also, if two teens DON'T have the opportunity to simply walk in and purchase the morning after pill, and they haven't made any plans (e.g. condoms) they may think twice about going all the way.

 

Okay

 

RIIIIIIGHT. If two teens want to have sex and don't have access to birth control, they generally just have sex and deal with the consequences later. At least with the morning after pill, there is a choice that involves cutting it off BEFORE the girl is pregnant.

Max, you never answered my question. Do you support banning the daily pill, IUDs, the patch, implants, and birth control shots? All of those methods work the same way as this drug and if you think they should be banned too then you are so rabid that it will be very hard to take you seriously on this issue. You seem so reasonable (about nearly everything else) that it is stunning to me that you cannot see the difference between this drug and those other methods of birth control.

 

Just as the embryo could attach if the woman were not taking the pill, did not have an IUD, or did not have a patch or implant. This drug is exactly the same as those birth control methods with the exception that it could be used after the fact.

So you see it as semantics that this drug prevents the woman from getting pregnant in the first place??? With that logic, the entire country must be going to hell with all of the terminated embryos we have every year from all the other methods of birth control. It apparently bears repeating that this drug does not cause abortion, it keeps a woman from getting pregnant in the first place, as do the other methods of birth control I mentioned.

And I stated that when asked for my own personal opinion, which I have the ability to separate in my mind from what I believe should be public policy. Apparently you do not have that same ability.

And I see liberty as the single thing that this country did pretty well for the first 225 years or so. There is absolutely nothing IMO that trumps liberty and that includes your definition of "life."

 

My opinion is that easy access (i.e. OTC) to a morning after pill will lead to an increase in non-marital sex. Having sex and then simply 'throwing away' the potential result is a show of disrespect towards human life.

 

The facts don't bear out your opinion. I invite you to read the following:

http://www.etr.org/recapp/stats/index.htm#BirthSexPregnancyRates

For those who don't want to click, some highlights.

Nowhere in there does it talk about access to contraceptives being among the top factors in initiation of sex. It may be a factor, but it seems to be a peripheral issue.

Changes in contraceptive use have had an impact on PREGNANCY rates, but it has not been proven to my satisfaction that access to different forms of contraceptives in today's world will meaningfully impact rates of sexual activity.

People who are going to have sex are going to have sex and the only thing that has been proven to change that is access to education and the hopes of educational advancement as illustrated in the study:

It is likely that this drug will simply become another tool in the belt of contraception users. There are thousands of different reasons that one might need different forms of contraception. Why shouldn't there be an array of choices available to fit more of the circumstances that are possible?

 

I did not see anything in the article that would dissuade my opinion. There is nothing that states having (or not having) easy access to birth control lessens or greatens sexual activity. It lists factors as to why teens may have sex but does not say one way or the other how birth control may affect it (other than pregnancy rates).

I think if you took teens (or adults for that matter) who were thinking of having sex and told them there is no artificial birth control available, they would think twice about having sex.

Just take a survey of your non married friends. Ask them what the odds would be of them having intercourse with and without artificial birth control methods being available. I would venture to guess that they would choose not to engage more often than not if there was a greater risk of pregnancy. Do you really think that would not impact their decision the majority of the time?

 

I'm sorry, but you lost all credibility with me when you said:

You are apparently one of those that believes that the only good sex is that which occurs in the marriage bed, but the reality of the situation is that by far the VAST majority of people do not believe that. You do not have the right to force your personal morality on the rest of the country by taking away their choices. I wish you could see what an America with illegal abortions and banned contraceptives would be like.

Sorry, but count me among those that believe that sex is a necessary part of growing up and learning what type of person will be "the one" for me. I found mine and sex was more than a small part of it.

The reality is that people will have sex. The reality is that we need to have more options when it comes to contraception, not less.

The pro-lifers would do well to embrace that which helps lead to the goal of reducing abortions.

 

I guess there are millions of Catholics and other denominations that are not credible to you either. The Catholic faith does not support the use of artificial birth control.

I will not apolgize for following the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (sex outside of marriage) as well as the tenets of my faith. I will not apologize for my value system in which I believe in the sanctity of marriage and the act of sex. I will not apologize for praying that people will understand the sanctity of human life and realize that everytime they engage in sex that a life may be created.

You may not agree with me, but to call me not credible for believing something that is deeply ingrained in my faith and my value system is disheartening. My parents share the same beliefs. My in-laws share these beliefs. When people lose their credibility in the eyes of others for practicing their beliefs which are held by millons and millions of others, then there is something wrong with the world.

 

andy --

i don't appreciate your tone. you can't keep characterizing someone who disagrees with you as completely unreasonable merely because they disagree with you. you can't keep redefining every one of my arguments with the slip and slide approach you do everytime we discuss these sorts of issues.

i'm done arguing with you on this. you value liberty over human life...i don't. the end.