• 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!

Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

What law is it contradictory to ?

Age of consent laws. How can a girl not give consent for sex, yet be left to her own devices on making such decisions?
 
Age of consent laws. How can a girl not give consent for sex, yet be left to her own devices on making such decisions?

You may have a valid point about the age of consent law.
I suggest you write to the judge who struck down the restrictions and that you also write to your US congresspersons since you feel this violates the age of consent laws.
 
I wouldn't know about what goes on in Europe, nor do I really care all that much.

So you care about its' effects on young females, but you don't care when experience in Europe shows that it has no bad effects on young females

I read that it's effects have NOT been studied on girls as young as 11. Also, do you think it's a good idea for an 11 or 12-year-old to be able to purchase this product without her parents' knowledge?

I do and since a number of people are arguing in support of this decision, I think it's safe to assume that they do too.
 
Do you think it is a good move to allow 11 and 12-year-old girls to make decisions regarding their sexuality? If the answer is yes, then what about consent laws? Are you for doing away with age of consent laws? What about sexual abuse?

I'm sorry, this should not be allowed without parental permission. It's not just about the potential for a young child to perhaps abuse this medication, but this is just opening up a Pandora's box when it comes to sexual abuse, age of consent, all kinds of things.

It's quite disturbing that anyone would be okay with "girls of ANY age" having unlimited access to this drug for a variety of reasons.

Whether we "allow" it or not, some young girls will engage in sex. This decision has nothing to do with allowing girls to make decision regarding their sexuality. It is about allowing young girls the aility to prevent potential pregnancies. By that time, they have already made a decision to have sex.
 
How about we end this back and forth that has far removed itself from my original comment and I'll state the gist of that comment again.

I basically said, counter to what Sangha was claiming, that the cost of the pill would not be a prohibiting issue to the under 17 year old child because under the new Obamacare HHS mandates, the morning after pill has to be included, free of any charge or co-pay, under all insurance policies and that the reproductive rights people and their friends in the Obama administration and HHS will ensure that the morning after pill will be available free of charge.

Over the counter, under the counter, whatever, my point was that the reproductive rights people will ensure that this court case, granting access to the morning after pill to under 17s without a prescription, will not be essentially voided by cost considerations. You may disagree, as is your right, but I stand by my opinion going forward.

And again, if a young child uses their parents insurance to pay for the pill, then it will show up on the EOB that the insurance company sends to the parent.

in addition, in order for the insurance to cover it, the child will have to go to the doctor to get a prescription
 
And again, if a young child uses their parents insurance to pay for the pill, then it will show up on the EOB that the insurance company sends to the parent.

in addition, in order for the insurance to cover it, the child will have to go to the doctor to get a prescription

I have no intention of getting into another circular argument with you - we disagree, period. If you want to cover new ground, that's fine - if not, have a good day.
 
I have no intention of getting into another circular argument with you - we disagree, period. If you want to cover new ground, that's fine - if not, have a good day.

Run away. It's the smartest thing you have done in this thread

The FACT that anyone having their insurance pay for their MAP will have to go to the doctor and get a prescription is not a matter of opinion. You are entitled to your opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.
 
Run away. It's the smartest thing you have done in this thread

The FACT that anyone having their insurance pay for their MAP will have to go to the doctor and get a prescription is not a matter of opinion. You are entitled to your opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.

I'm not running away from anything. However, I'm not an idiot either - I have no intention of satisfying some need you have. If you haven't the intellectual capacity to grasp the meaning of the words I posted, that's a shame, but nothing I can do about it - it's not for me to hand-hold you through them ad-nauseum. If that makes you feel as if somehow you've won, I'm happy I could bring you some joy to your day.
 
Anyway I already posted two articles that mentioned over the counter ( non prescription medications) are not covered in the
Affordable Health Care Act also known as Obamacare.
 
Didn't you say that processed food and plastic containers have a greater impact on hormones?

That's not precisely what I said.

I said that taking one dose of the morning after pill is likely going to influence your hormones less than consuming processed food and food in plastic containers over the long-term. I have not read evidence that the MAP negatively influences the endocrine system of girls, since they are mainly just single large doses of progesterone.

Young girls are not hitting puberty sooner because of the morning after pill. The culprit is most likely systemic pseudohormones in their diet. Young girls in other parts of the world where the diet is wholesome and normal are not experiencing early puberty.
 
I'm not running away from anything. However, I'm not an idiot either - I have no intention of satisfying some need you have. If you haven't the intellectual capacity to grasp the meaning of the words I posted, that's a shame, but nothing I can do about it - it's not for me to hand-hold you through them ad-nauseum. If that makes you feel as if somehow you've won, I'm happy I could bring you some joy to your day.

I understand what you said. You think that a young childs ability to get a MAP without their parent knowledge will be increased because they can have their parents insurance pay for, even though that means the parents will be informed (when they receive the EOB from the insurance company) and that the child will have to get a prescription (and the doctor visit required for the prescription will also result in notification on the EOB the parents receive)
 
Anyway I already posted two articles that mentioned over the counter ( non prescription medications) are not covered in the
Affordable Health Care Act also known as Obamacare.

And I said, in my opinion, the reproductive rights lobby and their friends in the Obama administration and HHS will see to it that it changes. My prediction won't be proven unless it happens, but it's my opinion and prediction and no matter how many times you post counter arguments that it's not allowed now it doesn't change the fact that it can change in the future.
 
And I said, in my opinion, the reproductive rights lobby and their friends in the Obama administration and HHS will see to it that it changes. My prediction won't be proven unless it happens, but it's my opinion and prediction and no matter how many times you post counter arguments that it's not allowed now it doesn't change the fact that it can change in the future.

Well the Affordable Health Care Act was already passed by Congress with no provision for any over the counter drugs so if Plan B remains an over the counter drug congress would need to add an amendment to the Health Care Act to allow Plan B to covered as an over the counter drug...I just don't see that happening.
 
Well the Affordable Health Care Act was already passed by Congress with no provision for any over the counter drugs so if Plan B remains an over the counter drug congress would need to add an amendment to the Health Care Act to allow Plan B to covered as an over the counter drug...I just don't see that happening.

Well I guess you should inform Obama and Sebelius that they have no power to adopt regulations under the act.
 
I wouldn't know about what goes on in Europe, nor do I really care all that much. I read that it's effects have NOT been studied on girls as young as 11. Also, do you think it's a good idea for an 11 or 12-year-old to be able to purchase this product without her parents' knowledge?
First, I'm not talking about European morality, I'm talking about health and science. To me, a decade of use (what IT guys call "in the wild") is plenty of evidence that there isn't a problem. An FDA study wouldn't be as good as simply looking at European health statistics.

Second, this case was about the FDA's responsibilities, so I think the decision was a good one. The FDA has no business making decisions about age except as it relates to health. Obviously, the evidence showed it was acceptable from a medical standpoint.


Lastly, your question suggests I ask you one. Do you believe underage girls should be allowed birth control of any kind without their parent's permission/knowledge?

PS
Reading further in the thread I see you answered this question. I do not believe that this is an invitation for girls to have sex. As for the abuse part, what's to stop an adult from buying it over-the-counter and giving it to the pre-teen? :shrug: Limiting access to young girls won't stop abuse.
 
Last edited:
Well I guess you should inform Obama and Sebelius that they have no power to adopt regulations under the act.

Well, As I stated much earlier in this thread President Obama and S of H Sibelius wanted to keep Plan B as a prescription drug for any person under 17. But the case went to court and the judge ruled that should be over the counter for any age.
 
Last edited:
How about we end this back and forth that has far removed itself from my original comment and I'll state the gist of that comment again.

I basically said, counter to what Sangha was claiming, that the cost of the pill would not be a prohibiting issue to the under 17 year old child because under the new Obamacare HHS mandates, the morning after pill has to be included, free of any charge or co-pay, under all insurance policies and that the reproductive rights people and their friends in the Obama administration and HHS will ensure that the morning after pill will be available free of charge.

Over the counter, under the counter, whatever, my point was that the reproductive rights people will ensure that this court case, granting access to the morning after pill to under 17s without a prescription, will not be essentially voided by cost considerations. You may disagree, as is your right, but I stand by my opinion going forward.
You can believe what you want. I have no doubt any insurance would cover this as a prescription and I would hope a 15 y/o rape victim would be given this pill in the ER and that insurance would cover it. That being said, I don't think anyone that walks in off the street and buys this OTC will be able to use their insurance to pay for it.
 
Well, if young girls don't need it and aren't the ones targeted, then why would they do away with the age limitation without a prescription?
Because this is a medical decision, not a political one.
 
Well, As I stated much earlier in this thread President Obama and S of H Sibelius wanted to keep Plan B as a prescription drug for any person under 17. But the case went to court and the judge ruled that should be over the counter for any age.

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, we don't know what Obama's position on the issue was but we do know that the FDA approved the morning after pill for sale over the counter to those under 17 but Sebelius vetoed that decision - it's why it ended up in court. Considering Obama's historical positions on choice issues, I think it's hard for you to claim he wanted it to remain via prescription only for those under 17.
 
You can believe what you want. I have no doubt any insurance would cover this as a prescription and I would hope a 15 y/o rape victim would be given this pill in the ER and that insurance would cover it. That being said, I don't think anyone that walks in off the street and buys this OTC will be able to use their insurance to pay for it.

Now? - you're right. Ever? - we'll see.
 
And I said, in my opinion, the reproductive rights lobby and their friends in the Obama administration and HHS will see to it that it changes.

This is counter-factual. The Obama administration resisted classifying this as an OTC drug for minors.
 
This is counter-factual. The Obama administration resisted classifying this as an OTC drug for minors.

Not at all - I'd be willing to bet that the Obama administration is delighted that the courts did their dirty work for them. It would have been politically dangerous to do it without the courts involvement. Let's see if the Justice Department appeals the decision on behalf of the administration, then you might have a point.
 
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, we don't know what Obama's position on the issue was but we do know that the FDA approved the morning after pill for sale over the counter to those under 17 but Sebelius vetoed that decision - it's why it ended up in court. Considering Obama's historical positions on choice issues, I think it's hard for you to claim he wanted it to remain via prescription only for those under 17.

Actually, it's not hard at all and you are mistaken

Obama defends Plan B decision 'as father of two daughters'

President Obama said today that "as the father of two daughters," he supports his Health secretary's decision to block over-the-counter sales of the Plan B "morning after" birth control pill to girls under 17 years of age.
 
Back
Top Bottom