• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Plan B will continue to be offered ONLY behind the counter

Tigger said:
I just don't see them as a "get out of jail free" card that allows you to then say "well, I didn't want to get pregnant so I should be allowed to terminate this pregnancy as a matter of choice."
Click to expand...

Uhhhhh, contraception has absolutely nothing to do with the abortion debate.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
The issue to me is that the side effects of Plan B can be a more significant than your run-of-the-mill OTC medication. It's not particularly dangerous, but it can certainly put you out of commission for a day or two if you're sensitive to hormones. It's basically like taking a fistful of birth control pills all at once.

I think this ruling makes sense. I think it is logical to ensure the woman knows the possible and likely side-effects by ensuring she has direct contact with a pharmtech.

Tessa's experience is extreme, but not especially uncommon. Hormones are tricky things. It's far more common than an adverse reaction to, say, aspirin or paracetamol.

I can't think of anything with common side effects as potentially severe as Plan B's that's over the counter. This is not to say most women will have side effects that bad - most won't. But a pretty significant chunk will have side effects somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, which is still more than other OTC drugs, and which is certainly something we need to make sure they know.

However, for this ruling to make sense, I think pharmtechs should be prohibited from denying it to women.

I disagree it should be prescription. Plan B can be very uncomfortable, but not particularly dangerous. If a woman has health complications which would make it dangerous, this is the sort of thing she would have been told over and over again by her doctor already. The time-sensitive nature of the beast means that if you make it prescription, it would be impossible for women to get it during the time period when it's mostly likely to work.
Click to expand...

You make a great point about horomones. As a teen I was told repeatedly that my horomones were pretty far out of wack and I'd had various reactions to different birth control pills that had made them less than desireable for me. At 18, I didn't make the direct correllation between the moderately uncomfortable side effects of birth control and the fact that Plan B is like the Hulk of birth control pills. Considering the stress of the situation I can see why many girls with similar issues might not make the connection.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Uhhhhh, contraception has absolutely nothing to do with the abortion debate.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with the abortion debate. There is ONE, 100% proven way to keep from getting pregnant.... ABSTINANCE. Anything beyond that is simply an attempt to limit the potential consequences of sexual intercourse. Some of those limiting factors... condoms, contraceptives, etc... are appropriate as they attempt to limit the chance of the pregnancy from occuring ahead of time. Others, like abortion on demand and (to a lesser degree) this "Morning After Pill" are attempts to undo limit the consequences after the fact. THAT is the problem so far as I'm concerned. Taking steps ahead of time is one thing.... attempting to avoid the consequences afterwards is another.
 
Tigger said:
It has everything to do with the abortion debate. There is ONE, 100% proven way to keep from getting pregnant.... ABSTINANCE. Anything beyond that is simply an attempt to limit the potential consequences of sexual intercourse. Some of those limiting factors... condoms, contraceptives, etc... are appropriate as they attempt to limit the chance of the pregnancy from occuring ahead of time. Others, like abortion on demand and (to a lesser degree) this "Morning After Pill" are attempts to undo limit the consequences after the fact. THAT is the problem so far as I'm concerned. Taking steps ahead of time is one thing.... attempting to avoid the consequences afterwards is another.
Click to expand...
abstinance only didn't work for the QUEEN of abstinance only a.k.a. sarah palin's family.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Why is that?
Click to expand...

I believe that people need to endure the consequences of the choices they make in life. You should not be engaging in sexual activity with someone until you are of the age, the financial situation and the emotional stability to be prepared to potentially be a parent. That is, I am against the idea of casual sex. I always have been.

I know that I have no interest in being a father. I would be a terrible parent. I am well aware of this. Therefore, even when I reach that point in a relationship where I would be willing to endure the consequences of the sexual act, I would prefer to avoid them. Therefore, after discussing the topic with the woman, I do engage in the use of contraceptives with the intent of preventing a potential pregnancy, but with the knowledge that if it doesn't work, I'll be marrying her and raising that child with her to the best of my ability to do so. Unlike many others who would suggest "alternative" methods of avoiding the responsibility/consequences I believe that one needs to own up to them and deal with them IF/WHEN they occur.
 
tessaesque said:
You make a great point about horomones. As a teen I was told repeatedly that my horomones were pretty far out of wack and I'd had various reactions to different birth control pills that had made them less than desireable for me. At 18, I didn't make the direct correllation between the moderately uncomfortable side effects of birth control and the fact that Plan B is like the Hulk of birth control pills. Considering the stress of the situation I can see why many girls with similar issues might not make the connection.
Click to expand...

If you were told and didn't make the connection on your own that proves that offering this behind the counter isn't going to make a difference. When you buy cold medicine behind the counter they don't tell you side effects. Heck, when I have gotten a new prescription at the pharmacy they ask if I have questions but they don't tell me the side effects. Your pharmacist doesn't know you are sensitive to BC. They are just going to give you the medicine.


When I went with a friend for her to get the morning after pill, the doctor told her it was equivalent to taking 2 regular birth control pills twice 12 hours apart and that it could make you nauseous. She didn't warn anything like what Tess explained. My point is that I don't think seeing a busy pharmacist for them to say okay here you go, please read the instructions and know the side effects is going to make a difference. I really think the issue, if there is one, was that anyone under 17 could then get it. If someone needs help they can still ask their pharmacist, but I don't think it should really be required.
 
lovetosing4678 said:
Obama: Morning-after pill decision 'common sense'


What do you think? Should this pill be allowed to be sold next to the condoms? They are about $50, according to the article, so people most likely wouldn't be buying them as they do condoms. Also, think of how often the pharmacy is often open. I know that sometimes when I have a cold by the time I can get to the store the pharmacy is closed. The sooner you take this pill the more effective it is. So what do you think?
Click to expand...

i don't think it should be available otc, so i am ok with this.
 
Whats the difference between preventing right before/during versus after though? Note: Right after. This is obviously before you know if you would be getting pregnant.

You believe that people need to endure the consequences. I think that if you use BC of any method than you are changing the circumstances to avoid the consequence and since you believe that a condom and maybe the pill is fine to use, what makes taking 2 pills instead of pills all the time different?
 
lovetosing4678 said:
Why do you not think it should be offered otc?
Click to expand...

because i don't think very young girls should have access in normal circumstances. it's a difficult question, but i think that 13 or 14 yr olds should be making that decision with their parents.
 
Tigger said:
I believe that people need to endure the consequences of the choices they make in life.
Click to expand...

No, my question was why you think there is a difference in attempting to prevent pregnancy before and after the act, abortion excluded for the purposes of this discussion.
 
majora$$hole said:
abstinance only didn't work for the QUEEN of abstinance only a.k.a. sarah palin's family.
Click to expand...

True. It didn't work because the program wasn't followed by her daughter. I know what would have happened in my family in that case.... She would have been tossed out on her ass and told not to come back until they were married and raising the child, if at all.


lovetosing4678 said:
Whats the difference between preventing right before/during versus after though? Note: Right after. This is obviously before you know if you would be getting pregnant.
Click to expand...

True, but it is AFTER the act. Whether it's right after, 12 hours later, or six weeks later is immaterial. The act has already been performed. The consequences/reprecussions have been EARNED. You had the fun, now you should have to potentially deal with what happens because of it.

lovetosing4678 said:
You believe that people need to endure the consequences. I think that if you use BC of any method than you are changing the circumstances to avoid the consequence and since you believe that a condom and maybe the pill is fine to use, what makes taking 2 pills instead of pills all the time different?
Click to expand...

The pill and the condom are attempts to stop the egg from being fertilized. It is my understanding that this pill is designed to keep a fertilized egg from becoming attached to the uterus. I am a believer that at the moment that egg is fertilized that life begins. I understand that's not the most popular opinion in the world these days. In my mind anything that is an attempt to keep that fertilized egg from growing is MURDER. Whether it's by aborting it or by keeping it from moving through the natural cycle required for it to grow.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
No, my question was why you think there is a difference in attempting to prevent pregnancy before and after the act, abortion excluded for the purposes of this discussion.
Click to expand...

See my response to "lovetosing" above this one.
 
thanks to the OP for bringing this to my attention
i am going today to purchase this pill to take tomorrow when i visit my daughter
hope she never needs to use it
but if she does, i want it to be available to her in a timely manner


concerned about the young women who might have to either endure an abortion or go to full term only because they were denied access to this drug when it could have avoided the results of an unintended pregnancy
 
justabubba said:
thanks to the OP for bringing this to my attention
i am going today to purchase this pill to take tomorrow when i visit my daughter
hope she never needs to use it
but if she does, i want it to be available to her in a timely manner


concerned about the young women who might have to either endure an abortion or go to full term only because they were denied access to this drug when it could have avoided the results of an unintended pregnancy
Click to expand...


So, since this article, and reasoning for this decision seems to be to restrict access to younger girls in the 13 yo age range, I assume your daughter is around that age. So my questions for you are such:

How sexually active is your daughter?

Since you have to "go see her.." I assume that you live apart from her? And how would her mother feel about you condoning her sexual activity through giving her these pills?

Don't you think if your daughter is that young that you are sending the wrong message?

j-mac
 
Tigger said:
True, but it is AFTER the act. Whether it's right after, 12 hours later, or six weeks later is immaterial. The act has already been performed. The consequences/reprecussions have been EARNED. You had the fun, now you should have to potentially deal with what happens because of it.
Click to expand...

This isn't an argument because of the fact that we have contraception that works "after the fact" so the same argument for taking contraceptives in either instance (before or after) applies.

What you need to clarify is what it is specifically about the act that concludes that utilizing contraception beforehand is acceptable while utilizing it after is not.

Don't you think if your daughter is that young that you are sending the wrong message?
Click to expand...

The proper message would be "sex is great just be responsible about it."
 
Last edited:
justabubba said:
concerned about the young women who might have to either endure an abortion or go to full term only because they were denied access to this drug when it could have avoided the results of an unintended pregnancy
Click to expand...

So you're comfortable with your daughter engaging in sexual relations which could lead to her getting pregnant even though you are saying she's not ready to be a parent? Why not just hand her a couple of running chainsaws to juggle or a loaded handgun to play with at the same time?
 
Khayembii Communique said:
This isn't an argument because of the fact that we have contraception that works "after the fact" so the same argument for taking contraceptives in either instance (before or after) applies.

What you need to clarify is what it is specifically about the act that concludes that utilizing contraception beforehand is acceptable while utilizing it after is not.
Click to expand...

No we don't have contraceptives that work after the fact. It is my understanding that this (and other) things are designed not to stop the fertilization, but to stop the body from accepting the fertilized egg. That is NOT contraception so far as I'm concerned.

The importance of "the act" is that it's a knowing, willing, and consenting act. 99% of people who are engaging in the act understand what the potential consequences of that act may be. If you are unwilling to potentially accept those consequences, don't consent to the act. In my mind consenting to that act is also consenting to a potential pregnancy and the consequences thereof.
 
Tigger said:
So you're comfortable with your daughter engaging in sexual relations which could lead to her getting pregnant even though you are saying she's not ready to be a parent? Why not just hand her a couple of running chainsaws to juggle or a loaded handgun to play with at the same time?
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is comfortable when their son or daughter is engaging in sexual relations. But it does happen, regardless. It's better to be prepared.
 
Tigger said:
No we don't have contraceptives that work after the fact. It is my understanding that this (and other) things are designed not to stop the fertilization, but to stop the body from accepting the fertilized egg. That is NOT contraception so far as I'm concerned.

The importance of "the act" is that it's a knowing, willing, and consenting act. 99% of people who are engaging in the act understand what the potential consequences of that act may be. If you are unwilling to potentially accept those consequences, don't consent to the act. In my mind consenting to that act is also consenting to a potential pregnancy and the consequences thereof.
Click to expand...

Your argument would be valid if the only people to suffer the consequences were the ones engaging in the sexual act. However, if they are forced to have a child that is unwanted, then the child suffers in the long run. Trust me, I've known a few people in my life who definitely shouldn't have been parents. The children always end up suffering. Plan B is far more humane, in my opinion.
 
Tigger said:
No we don't have contraceptives that work after the fact. It is my understanding that this (and other) things are designed not to stop the fertilization, but to stop the body from accepting the fertilized egg. That is NOT contraception so far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

Okay, so do you consider this abortion or not?

The importance of "the act" is that it's a knowing, willing, and consenting act. 99% of people who are engaging in the act understand what the potential consequences of that act may be. If you are unwilling to potentially accept those consequences, don't consent to the act. In my mind consenting to that act is also consenting to a potential pregnancy and the consequences thereof.
Click to expand...

And again, the potential consequences of the act are mitigated by contraception, so this isn't a valid argument.
 
Lots of pharmacists have stated that if it is available OTC and available to younger girls, they wont sell them to them anyway without parental approval. Also more and more pharmacies are going to a system where before you leave with your prescription (of any type) you have to meet with the pharmacist and she gives you any side effects he or she feels you need to be aware of and gives you a chance to ask any questions you have.. Our local walmart pharmacy does that.

Personally, Im not really sure if it should be OTC or prescription only, I havent really thought about it that deeply. But I think this is terrific thing for victims of rape and the like. I dont think you can compare it to abortion as when you are taking the pill there is no baby yet. You arent "getting rid" of anything... you are "preventing" something from happening.
 
j-mac said:
So, since this article, and reasoning for this decision seems to be to restrict access to younger girls in the 13 yo age range, I assume your daughter is around that age. So my questions for you are such:
Click to expand...
wrong assumption. my daughter is 22. i want her to have ready access to this pill should she ever choose to use it

How sexually active is your daughter?
Click to expand...
don't know
that is for her to determine
my job, as her dad, is to make life easier for her if i am reasonably able to do so
she advised me that she took the oath to be a virgin until marriage; of course, that was when she was very active in the church. she was quite young then. she and i have also had a discussion about the morality of abortion. again, only an exchange of views. she, as her brother, thinks for herself. it's expected in our family

kids still laugh about my 14 year old son coming home to find a box of condoms i had placed on his bed
don't know when he because sexually active, but wanted to make sure he had protection if he was (or intended to be)

Since you have to "go see her.." I assume that you live apart from her?
Click to expand...
yes, four hours away. she manages a medical practice (but that does not mean she will have these meds available to her should she ever need them. note that a mechanic still has a spare tire in his car if one is ever needed)

And how would her mother feel about you condoning her sexual activity through giving her these pills?
Click to expand...
won't ask. just as i did not when i provided my son a box of condoms and in a subsequent discussion told him that i would get him more, without question, should he indicate a need. (it's intimidating for a young person to buy condoms in a pharmacy)
this was between me and my kids. but my wife and i were both pleased when the doctor prescribed bc pills for my young, teen aged daughter ... presumedly for something other than birth control. she was not happy with my decision to give my son unsolicited condoms

Don't you think if your daughter is that young that you are sending the wrong message?
Click to expand...
no. when she was a very young teen and told me she took the virgin oath, she seemed quite proud. my fear was that she took it with the other girls at the church because it would have been the way to avoid controversy. i explained to her that was her decision. that if she chose to decide to have sex before marriage all i expected was that she not feel pressured to do so and that she practice safe sex
previously, in scouting, my son was unable to profess a belief in G-d, subsequent to earning the G-d and Me badge. after earning that badge his fellow scouts joined the sponsoring church. the scout master (an attorney) attempted to remove him from the scouts for his refusal to swear a belief in G-d. as a scout leader i was able to intervene and prevent that result. my younger daughter was aware of that incident and i wanted to make sure she was not taking the vow only to avoid what her brother had experienced, for holding to his own views

j-mac
Click to expand...
would welcome your assessment
 
Plan B needs to stay behind the counter. It would be absurd to make it an OTC item. In some states the pharmacist can actually write the prescription for you so you can get it if you "need" it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom