Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

Obama Puts Politics Over Science with Plan B Appeal

President Obama and Secretary Sebelius lead a question & answer segment to address seniors issues with the Affordable Care Act. [HHS photo by Chris Smith]

President Obama and Secretary Sebelius lead a question & answer segment to address seniors issues with the Affordable Care Act. [HHS photo by Chris Smith]

AH, yes, paternalism.

America’s Father, Barack Obama, finally deciding to fight hard, but it’s to keep a perfectly safe medical product away from young teen girls. He thinks it will keep them from having sex or if they do it will force them to go to a parent or guardian if they get into trouble.

The ignorance of our leaders is second only to their stupefying naïveté; if only it wasn’t so dangerously counterproductive. In the 21st century science is now irrelevant.

Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is acting as Obama’s shield, which is representative of the politics of Kansas, where she’s from, not the science of the American medical community. It’s the same logic that brought us Obamacare instead of universal single payer health care.

Keeping Plan B, the morning-after pill, away from young teenagers, because you don’t understand sexuality begins at puberty, whether adults like it or not, makes no sense. But this decision isn’t about sense or science. It’s pure naked politics, the worst of its kind.

From the New York Times:

The Obama administration said Wednesday that girls under 15 should not have access to the most common morning-after contraceptive pill as the Justice Department filed a notice to appeal a judge’s order that would make the drug available without a prescription for girls and women of all ages.

The appeal reaffirms an election-year decision by Mr. Obama’s administration to block the drug’s maker from selling it without consideration of age, and puts the White House back into the politically charged issue of access to emergency contraception.

Evidently the term emergency contraception blew right over President Obama’s head.

That he can’t relate to what this means to poor teen girls is unsurprising.

The statement from the FDA reveals what a nightmare this will be for young teens.

The product will now be labeled “not for sale to those under 15 years of age *proof of age required* not for sale where age cannot be verified.” Plan B One-Step will be packaged with a product code prompting a cashier to request and verify the customer’s age. A customer who cannot provide age verification will not be able to purchase the product. In addition, Teva has arranged to have a security tag placed on all product cartons to prevent theft.

In addition, Teva will make the product available in retail outlets with an onsite pharmacy, where it generally, will be available in the family planning or female health aisles. The product will be available for sale during the retailer’s normal operating hours whether the pharmacy is open or not.

There is no reason, but disrespect and fundamental misunderstanding of what it’s like to be a young teen at puberty, to keep Plan B from being made widely available without having to identify yourself and your age. What this means for teen girls 15 and 16 or those who don’t have an ID is obvious.

RHReality Check:

…it still requires a prescription for a subset of the population potentially in need of EC, and therefore creates a significant barrier, especially for low-income teens under 15 years of age or those without ID who “look” younger and are denied access. Emergency contraception is for emergencies. It prevents unintended pregnancy by preventing ovulation, and is therefore most effective when taken within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse (including in cases when another contraceptive method may have failed). The need to see a physician to obtain a prescription that the public health and medical communities have deemed unnecessary is both time-consuming and expensive, and will entail additional indirect costs in terms of loss of time at school and work, likely on the part of both teens and their parents….

Teen girls having sex scares our political culture, which is paying no attention at all to the medical community, while being led around by religious conservatives who are putting young girls in danger. Since Plan B has been judged safe at any age and thus should be made available over the counter then politicians should trust the people who know the science.

Neither Obama of Sebelius are serving teen girls by keeping a product out of their reach that could keep them from ruining their lives. Sloppy impulse control is a hallmark of many teens and making sure they have a medically safe and approved way out when they screw up is the job of Secretary Kathleen Sebelius who has failed young teens yet again.

President Obama is the reason mini-Stupaks spread like wild fire after ACA passed, putting women in danger in state after state, which happened after he coddled the right by codifying the Hyde Amendment into health care law, and he’s doing it again with this action.

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

34 Responses to Obama Puts Politics Over Science with Plan B Appeal

  1. secularhumanizinevoluter May 2, 2013 at 5:05 am #

    Oh sweet jeebus crispies onna pogo stick what is WRONG with this man?!!!!!! What…is he trying to shore up his support among right wingnut UBERChristians?

    • Ramsgate May 2, 2013 at 10:09 am #

      Well said. He is. Always trying to please the right.

  2. Joyce Arnold May 2, 2013 at 8:24 am #

    Paternalism and patriarchy — Father knows best …

  3. ladywalker68 May 2, 2013 at 10:08 am #

    This is Obama being Obama. He talked a good story about women’s rights during the election, but once in office, he is back to kicking us in the ovaries. He doesn’t care now that he is back in office.

    I have no idea what he thinks he is doing nor anyone who believes they can mandate sexual behavior by changing the law.

  4. Jell-OH Schott May 2, 2013 at 10:13 am #

    This is just mind-numbingly stupid. This will add cost and complexity to an already bloated health care system and will not stop one girl from getting the drug. Teens will just have a friend who is over 15 get it for them. My God, that is how we got beer when I was underage. What could possibly be the justification for the appeal? I simply cannot fathom any logic other than they think girls under 15 shouldn’t be sexually active. It won’t deter that either.

  5. DaGoat May 2, 2013 at 10:40 am #

    Agree with all of this, it’s pure politics and in most areas not even consistent with existing laws relating to pregnancy, birth control and STD’s. . I suspect demanding proof of age will also intimidate some girls over 15 into not getting the medication. I was very surprised Obama took this approach.

  6. newdealdem1 May 2, 2013 at 10:45 am #

    Carrots and sticks. Last Friday, Obama deserved the carrots for speaking at Planned Parenthood and now he gets the stick.

    “The appeal also reinforces Ms. Sebelius’s original 2011 decision, which proved to be very good politics for Mr. Obama at the time. Facing a difficult re-election battle, the Democratic president enthusiastically supported Ms. Sebelius, saying that as a father of two young daughters, he thought it was the right call to have made.”

    The last shameful refuge for those who pander politically in this way is to use their family as an example of why they came to a decision. And, it WAS his call and not Sebelius, I have no doubt about that.

    He has nothing to lose by not appealing the Judge’s ruling last month. Just as he had lots of political capital when he was first elected and squandered it during the ACA fight as he stubbornly refused to listen to his base and at least fight for a Public Option, he asked for way less and got way less than that and he’s doing the same thing in his second term with the sequester and now this idiotic pander to the even more rabid GOP now dominated by the Tea Party freaks. And, he spits in the face of science whilst doing real potential harm to teenage girls who need this protection which IS safe and necessary to prevent a pregnancy which for poor teen girls will very rarely not mean having their lives altered and possibly ruined forever whilst making it even more impossible to not remain in poverty.

    Those of us who have daughters who are or will soon reach puberty and who have taught or will soon teach their kids the importance of delaying sexual intercourse until they are old enough to handle it, those kids don’t always listen to their parents as we all know. Also, some kids can’t confide in their parents if they did get pregnant so where do they go if they cannot have this type of contraception available to them. It’s not easy dealing with this as a parent but we live in the real world and no matter how much we will strongly advise our daughter to delay having sexual intercourse until she can handle it, things happen. All you need do is try to remember what it was like for you and your friends when you were her age.

    As a parent, I would much rather she is not only aware of these things and that she would come to us for our help if she became pregnant. But, again, that may not happen. So no matter how much you do as a parent to teach your kid about sexuality and responsibility, what more “serious consequence” can you imagine for an early adolescent than an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy? And, especially if that early adolescent is poor.

    So, Obama’s decision to appeal the Judge’s ruling is not only a mistake but a cruel one at that.

    “This is a decision that the Justice Department is making in representing our client: F.D.A.,” the official said. “This is not a political decision. It’s not had White House intervention or involvement. This in our judgment is the right legal step to take in this case.”

    What a load of crapola. The WH is decision-central for all departments and agencies under it’s control.

    And, my continued boundless disgust at the hypocrisy of politicians, clergy, pundits, and activists who fight against contraception which reduces the need for abortion, knows no bounds. And, who suffers? The women and the children born of an unwanted pregnancy.

    And, these are the people to whom Obama panders when pushed enough because he’s afraid to fight.

    And, I lost my respect for Sebelius during the ACA fight back in ’09. A weaker cabinet Secretary I cannot now recall.

  7. ladywalker68 May 2, 2013 at 10:48 am #

    United States of America-2013: Gender View from the Top

    “Boys will be boys, but God forbid if a girl decides to be a girl.”

    • Taylor Marsh May 2, 2013 at 11:10 am #

      PERFECT.

      Absolutely pitch perfect.

  8. james richardson May 2, 2013 at 1:50 pm #

    The things he chooses to fight for…

  9. ogenec May 2, 2013 at 1:56 pm #

    Wow, I have a completely different reaction to this. As in, you mean girls as young as 15 can get Plan B over the counter?!?!? For me, that is an unpalatable notion. Perhaps that strikes some of you as paternalistic. But one, I AM a father – of two girls. “Paternalism” comes with the job, methinks. And two, I don’t presume to tell anyone else how they should raise their kids. All the parents who disagree with this decision are welcome to accompany their underage girls to the counter and procure Plan B for them. Problem solved, no?

    Oh wait, there’s the “emergency” and “poor teen girls” argument. It would be more convincing if its proponents would demonstrate its limiting principles. However, they do not. Instead, they argue that all teen girls should have access to contraception OTC to protect those who need it on an emergency basis. What is an emergency basis, exactly; who makes the call; and why can’t the prescription solution adequately address that particular risk? They don’t say.

    I also think the criticism conflates the issue of reproductive rights and family issues. For example, I don’t take any issue with Plan B being available to adult women. Indeed, I celebrate it. But children are another matter entirely. Regardless of whether she has gone through puberty (and it’s occurring earlier for more girls), there is still the issue of whether the girl is emotionally and mentally ready for sexual activity. That is what the whole notion of “age of consent” is predicated upon, and I don’t imagine we’re ready to assess THAT on a case by case basis, and independent of the girl’s parents. And the “they’ll do it anyway” argument applies equally to other things we are in favor of outlawing, such as prostitution. So I don’t find that argument persuasive either.

    I do agree with one point, though – this is a White House call through and through. In my personal opinion, it is the right one. I think it’s madness to allow a 13-year old to stroll into a store and get Plan B without parental involvement or a prescription. But that’s just me.

    • Taylor Marsh May 2, 2013 at 2:50 pm #

      My hubby is a father of 3 girls, voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012. He was at least as outraged over the decision as I was, so I’m not sure fatherhood (or motherhood) is an impressive argument, especially since this is about the public policy. Surely parents can control their own children, which is the job, after all.

      It’s also about teen girls that don’t have great fathers like you or Mark, as well as poor teens. It really puts them in a horrible position.

      Obama can’t relate to poor women or teen girls with no parental help. It’s tragic.

      It comes down to a public health issue, with science and medical establishment clearly weighing in on full access to all women and girls. Parents can rule over their family as they see fit, but individual family issues must not take precedence over the public health aspect, especially when science supports the total safety of a product.

      • ogenec May 2, 2013 at 4:05 pm #

        My hubby is a father of 3 girls, voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012. He was at least as outraged over the decision as I was, so I’m not sure fatherhood (or motherhood) is an impressive argument, especially since this is about the public policy. Surely parents can control their own children, which is the job, after all.
        ________________

        That’s precisely my point. The question is whether a 13-year old girl can get Plan B over the counter without her parents’ approval or a prescription. If the critics of this decision get their way, the answer is yes. I can hardly “control” my daughters from getting something the government says they have the right to regardless of whether I consent.

        • Taylor Marsh May 2, 2013 at 4:32 pm #

          Again, it’s first public policy that is backed by science and the medical establishment. That should be the end of it.

          The object is for parents to have relationships with their kids so a girl can come to you. Ah, but there’s a problem, as you admit, because even young teen girls want privacy on some matters, which means you, as a parent, can’t control them.

          I believe young teens are individuals and have rights.

          I understand that some parents think their right of parenting overrides the rights as a teen girl, especially if they are underage and living under your roof. I’m just not one of them and neither is my husband.

          • secularhumanizinevoluter May 2, 2013 at 6:14 pm #

            “Wow, I have a completely different reaction to this. As in, you mean girls as young as 15 can get Plan B over the counter?!?!? For me, that is an unpalatable notion.”

            Cause as we all know…Daddy knows best….especially if he’s the Daddy of the baby or some other adult the girl is to terrified to identify. And anyway…don’t parents OWN their children? I mean they can sell them into slavery or stone them to death for being disobe….WOOOPS….that’s only if they are UBERChristians!!

          • ogenec May 3, 2013 at 12:07 am #

            I understand that some parents think their right of parenting overrides the rights as a teen girl, especially if they are underage and living under your roof. I’m just not one of them and neither is my husband.
            ______________

            Again, that’s my point. You and your husband remain free to do as you consider best with your family. If you want your young teen girl to have access to Plan B, you can make that happen. If my wife and I happen to reach a different conclusion with respect to our young teens, we can enforce that as well. Seems to me that everyone should be happy with that formulation.

            For secular, you’ve got me exactly backwards. I don’t own my children. All I own is the sacred duty and obligation of raising them in the best way my wife and I know how. As Khalil Gibran says, our kids come through us but not from us, and they do not belong to us. We are not the archer; we are simply his bow. And our job is to be stable, that the archer’s arrows may fly swift and far.

          • jjamele May 3, 2013 at 7:29 am #

            Taylor, why isn’t Secular’s comment a “personal attack” under the new rules? You and ogenec are having an intelligent, thoughtful debate revealing good arguments on both sides, and Sec comes in with a nasty, dismissive “oh yeah Father Knows Best” line which includes allusions to SLAVERY and adults who want to “own” their children. It added absolutely nothing to the discussion, it created a ridiculous, “Shut Up or Agree With Me” Strawman…yet, there it is, approved for submission. I really don’t get this at all.

          • Taylor Marsh May 3, 2013 at 7:53 am #

            jjamele May 3, 2013 at 7:29 am # Edit

            Taylor, why isn’t Secular’s comment a “personal attack” under the new rules?

            I didn’t take it as a personal attack against ogenec. It is a case of “daddy knows best” that sech was directly addressing, which I brought up in the first line of this piece.

            As for “UBERChristians,” I’ve told sech his anti-religious language is too over the top for me. I can let 1 of these references slide, but if there were more than one I would not have okayed the comment.

            But you’re right, there was a more engaging way for sech to make his comment & still make his point.

          • ogenec May 3, 2013 at 11:19 am #

            The irony about the “Daddy knows best” argument is this. I’m saying, let the family (not just the father) make the decision for the 13- or 14-year old. If they want her to have access under this rule, she will. If they don’t, she won’t. The benefit of this rule is that every family has autonomy.

            The rest of you are saying no, the government can and should override the parents’ wishes, reach directly into the family unit, and empower the young girl to have access to Plan B over her parents’ objections. In other words, unlike my position, you want the government to impose YOUR policy preferences on ME. My family’s autonomy be damned.

            You may not realize it, but that is a “Daddy knows best” argument – “Daddy” is the government in this scenario.

  10. Lake Lady May 2, 2013 at 4:17 pm #

    Ogenic~ Good to hear from you and I hope your girls and baby boy are doing well, he must be going on two or so now.

    I have to agree with Taylor and disagree with you. Having spent most of my career teaching teens I think I am fairly realistic which neither you nor the President are in this situation. If only some young girls had parents like you or the prez but sadly that is not the case by a long shot. Do you realize that some young girls have actually been made pregnant by their fathers or their mother’s boyfriend? Now in a perfect world a sexually active young person would have supportive,loving parents to help them make decisions and get through the perilous age as unscared as possible but we do not live in a perfect world and neither do way too many young women.

    What this would do is leave them isolated and totally and stuck in their powerless state. First they don’t have the power to keep themselves safe from predators and then they have no power to hold on to their lives and futures.You and he would continue to enslave them to their biology.

    Any thinking that easy access to an emergency drug ( any pregnancy in a 15 year old is an emergency..jeez) would be giving permission for young girls to be sexually active just makes me want to ask..do you believe in the nanny state that will do your parenting for you? The way to raise young women who value themselves and who have a vision for their own future that includes education, career, a stable future is to empower them NOT keep them dependent children.

    • Taylor Marsh May 2, 2013 at 4:34 pm #

      Heya LLady. Yeah, I’ve talked to many, many people on this and it’s pretty clear what happened here, with teen girls and public policy being sacrificed, as is the science and medical community, for politics.

      Obama’s always trying to court conservatives. It’s one of his primary weaknesses.

    • ogenec May 2, 2013 at 11:57 pm #

      LL, good to hear from you as well. Yes, our kids are doing well, thank you for asking. Let me start with where we agree. I agree that any pregnancy in a 15-year old is an emergency. That’s not who we are talking about. 15-year olds have the ability to get Plan B without parental consent or a prescription under this rule.

      What I am objecting to is the notion of girls in their early teens – 13 and 14 – having the ability to get Plan B without parental involvement OR a prescription. And I’ve never argued that having access to Plan B makes you sexually promiscuous. I am simply saying that, IF my 13 or 14 year old is sexually active, I want her mom and I to know about it. And I want her mom and I to help her make the decision about what to do. That’s our job as parents. But if the law is that she has the ability to get Plan B regardless of her parents’ wishes, then our ability to perform that job is diminished.

      We should be able to agree on that, right? Where we appear to diverge is in how much we respectively weight that diminution in parental authority. For you, it seems to be worth it to protect the young teens who don’t have a supportive family structure. Implicitly you seem to be arguing that my kids will be okay in any event. For me, I hope you are right, but I don’t see why my wife and I should be asked to assume the risk. I don’t think the government should be the arbiter of that decision. And I think there are better and more effective ways to intervene in the lives of girls who are not as fortunate as my daughters.

      Finally, the dreaded “slippery slope” argument. Why stop with 13- or 14-year olds? Why not just say that any girl that reaches puberty has the right to Plan B over the counter, parental consent or prescription be damned? After all, the logic applies to such young girls just as forcefully, if not more so. And the point of that hypothetical is to say that it’s not a black or white issue – we agree that a line should be drawn somewhere along the continuum from puberty to majority, we just disagree on where precisely that should be.

      • spincitysd May 3, 2013 at 11:51 am #

        Shall we begin sir? Ready, steady, go.

        I’m going to leave the subject of teen sexuality on the table for now, just like a gun in a Chekhov Play. Let us approach this policy from the aspect of how drugs are sold and what the standard used to be. Let me introduce a term here : GRAS Generally Recognized As Safe.

        GRAS drugs are issued without a prescription, and to the general public without limitations. This is why you can pick up a bottle of Motrin from Costco that will last you a year. Anyone can pick that stuff up, even a five year old if they have the money. This is because when used as directed Motrin is safe as directed. Yes, it does have that adult-proof cap to prevent accidental overdose, but once you can pop that sucker off, it’s good times for all.

        Motrin is labeled as GRAS, like aspirin because it’s very effective at what it does and has relatively few side effects. Years of use have proven it to be something the general public can use without bad effect. In other words, the science proves to any reasonable person that for the indications of pain relief and fever control Motrin can be used with very little drama. This is the result of decades of test, trials, and history.

        Now let’s look at Plan B. Is it safe? As a one-time use product it is ridiculously safe. It does what it does, and not much else. Can it be abused? Um, not really. So like codeine and other narcotics no one is going to get a cheep high off Plan B. This is not even Robitussin DM territory we are talking about, no high from Plan B, zilch. Can you OD from plan B? Um, not really. Hello, single use product, kind of hard to OD on hormones. Can it be taken incorrectly? Um, not really, it’s a single use pill, kind of hard to screw that up. Maybe the blister pack might give a woman some agita but not much more than that.

        So, safe, effective, no down sides from a use perspective. What is the history? What’s the science? Well sorry to say for all the concerned dads and moms out there, safe again. Research after research has show Plan B to be absolutely safe. No issues. Not a one. Women under 15 can properly take this medication with zero drama.

        Thus, there is no, none, zero, zilch, reason for this drug not to be OTC and available to sexual active females. And that dear man is where the freak out begins. You and millions of other dads and moms are freaking out that your “little girl” is becoming a woman — full stop.

        Teen sexuality is a really fraught issue Ogenec; I feel your pain. Hormones kick in and the human animal goes more than little crazy. It’s a time of testing boundaries, testing this aspect of our lives that did not really exist in the form and urgency it does in adolescence. What is this urge? What is this feeling? Hey, this sex thing looks like it could be a lot of fun. Hey, doing this feels good! And so it goes.

        Again, I feel your pain. I’m not going to try to guess some of the silly, perhaps stupid things, you did as a teen, mainly because I have more than enough on my own plate from my own personal crashing and flailing about. But I will say that while your concerns are valid you have no right to impose your concerns on others as policy.

        I personally hope that your darling daughters do right, that they follow the morality and example you have set and laid down. I hope that if they do screw up, that they can come to you, talk to you and listen to you. But here’s the rub sir, in the end you have to trust them to make the final decision. Bottom line, your daughters are starting to make decisions for themselves; keep calm, do not panic, it will be O.K. Be a good father and support them. Trust them and trust that you have been marginal competent as a father, that the values you have instilled in them have given them the proper path to follow.

        Unfortunately, Ogenec far too many teens do not have good fathers or mothers. Unfortunately, far too many teens have to raise themselves. They have absent, or worse yet, abusive parents. And when these women get into trouble, they have damn few options. The last thing they need is some adult trying to slut-shame and harass them because of a mistake. The last thing they need is some moralizing, overbearing daddy figure who has no clue of what kind of hell they live in to impose his idea of the “right thing to do.”

        Please note Ogenec how I keep saying women. And again that is the crux of the issue. Teens are no longer girls, they are becoming women. They are becoming sexually active women. Our Chekhovian gun has gone off. The 800 pound gorilla is off the couch and tearing up the living room. What to do? Deal with the facts, girls grow up to be women, that is the best option. As women they are full human beings with rights. They must be allowed to make their own decisions about their own bodies. Maybe you can help guide them. Maybe you can provide the tools so they don’t make all the damn-fool mistakes you made when you were there age. And maybe they will make a few damn-fool mistakes that you never knew existed. But you have to let your daughters forge their own way. You can not be big daddy forever, and you should not let the government become big daddy either. You have to let your little girls become full actualized human beings. You have to let them explore, discover, and get comfortable with a whole host of adult issues; sex being just one of them. Government is of no use here, Obama is of no use. Don’t let these people pander to your fear. Don’t let them pander to your anxiety. They do not have your best interest at heart. Trust your daughters. Trust yourself.

        I am spincitysd and I await approval of this message.

        • ogenec May 3, 2013 at 3:01 pm #

          Spincity, you just spent a ton of words beating back a straw man. I’m not scared of my daughters growing up to be women. Not in the least. I’m very excited to see how they mature and come into their own. And my wife and I want to, and are obligated to, help with that.

          You seem to want a big fat rhetorical fight with me over principle. I’ve no interest in that. As I said previously, the issue for me is not the principle – it’s just the rather mundane issue of where you draw the line. (Presumably, we would all draw the line somewhere.) Conservatives say majority. Obama says 15. You say 13. And I’m simply saying, on balance, 15 sounds about right to me. And the beauty part is that any parent who feels differently is free to do whatever they want. Sounds like pareto optimality has been achieved.

          • spincitysd May 4, 2013 at 5:42 am #

            “As I said previously, the issue for me is not the principle — it’s just the rather mundane issue of where you draw the line.” … ” And I’m simply saying, on balance, 15 sounds about right to me.”

            The point is Obama has no right to draw any line– full stop. Generally Recognized As Safe, no danger to the teen, no danger of abuse, no possibility of overdose, no reason to take it for any other reason than as indicated, works as indicated. This is a straight-down-the-middle OTC drug.

            This is not something that is subject to your opinion, to Obama’s opinion, or any other person’s opinion. The science is in, the process is complete, the same way it is or was for any other OTC medication on the market. I am trying mightily to stay calm here.

            This is a drug, taken for an indication. The only proper consideration should be, is the drug safe and effective for that indication? Is aspirin safe and effective for the indication of pain and fever relief? Yes. Is Tylenol safe and effective for the indication of pain and fever relief? Yes. Does Claritin provide safe, effective, temporary relief from allergies? Yes. That is the golden rule. We label and deploy OTC drugs for general use to the general public in a very specific way according to a very specific process. No guess work. No “opinions” from the general public about what may or may not be “proper.”

            Drugs are used for an indication, to a purpose. What you have a problem with is the indication. A very specific indication that has nothing to do with the safe and effective use of this drug. Your opinion about that indication has zero merit; none. It is not a legitimate reason to block the deployment of this drug for general use.

            Are we now on the same wavelength?

            The decision to block OTC deployment of Plan B was illegitimate. It fundamentally violated a standard that has served us in good stead for about one hundred years. It violated a process backed by reason, judgement and science. It shredded that process to serve crass political considerations.

            If this were any other drug for any other indication we would not even be having this little food fight. But we are dealing with a drug that does have an indication, emergency contraception, that causes usually sane and reasonable people to loose all notions of propriety or common sense.

            I’m not going even try to guess when a woman should or should not start having sex. I’m not going to guess when anyone should or should not start having sex. I’m going to deal with the facts on the ground; full stop.

            I know that unfortunately some females have had non-consensual sex even before they reach puberty. I know some females have sex right after puberty. I know that sometimes that means “babies having babies.” At that juncture, it is imperative that teens should have the option not to have a baby. It is imperative she should not to put up with any flack, or have to ask “mother/daddy may I?” I know that there is no good reason for the government stepping in and interfering with that woman’s decision. There is no sound medical reason. There is no justification. There is only people freaking out on the subject of teen sexuality.

            Drugs are used for specific indications, specific uses. They are not used in specific counter-indications. Along with the side effects those are the only criteria for drug use. Your morality has nothing to do with it. Your feelings have nothing to do with it. It’s a drug, it has a purpose. Deal with the purpose; not the drug.

            I am spincitysd and I await approval of this message.

  11. Lake Lady May 2, 2013 at 5:45 pm #

    I’m wih you on that Taylor, it kills me when I hear his fan club in the media(Jonathon Alter comes to mind) try to explain his personaliy by explaining to all us rubes the prestdent just is not “needy”. Put aside the obvious CDS they are wrong.For some reason they fail to see whose approval he seeks.

  12. ladywalker68 May 2, 2013 at 9:58 pm #

    So where is the out cry for putting into place a law that a young man has to be at least 17 years old to purchase condoms???

    Yep. Let’s take them off the shelves because guys under 17 shouldn’t be having sex or at least they should have to tell their parents they want to buy condoms so the parents can discourage such behavior….

    • ogenec May 3, 2013 at 12:10 am #

      That’s an easy one – I agree! I certainly do not my 13- or 14-year old having the ability to buy condoms without my or my wife’s consent.

      • ladywalker68 May 3, 2013 at 9:09 am #

        Hi, ogenec- Maybe easy for you but this will never happen. Have you ever heard anyone in recent years anywhere in politics stating that condoms should not be accessible to kids under 15?

        Crickets…..

        That’s because most of the country is fine with boys being sexually active at 15 but not girls, because by golly, guys just can’t help themselves and gotta have sex! But not girls! And if a young girl has sex and gets pregnant then the burden is all hers to bear! She must put her life on hold and have the kid, but the boy who got her pregnant? Well he was just being a boy!

        • ladywalker68 May 3, 2013 at 9:26 am #

          Also, I need to add, there is not an entire political party (Republicans) conspiring to block access to birth control for young boys and being extremely vocal about it with the assistance of the President of the United States of America.

          • ogenec May 3, 2013 at 11:33 am #

            For the sake of argument, let’s stipulate that some Republicans are “conspiring” to deny women and girls their hard-fought reproductive rights. Does that fact automatically invalidate any attempts to balance indidivual autonomy against parental supervision? Does it mean that any such attempts are automatically infirm because they help the “enemy”?

            I just don’t find that kind of zero-sum thinking very constructive. In my view, it is precisely that kind of attitude that has contributed to the utter inability of our government to do anything of any real import. Put differently, your argument is simply the flipside to the NRA argument that we cannot enact sensible background check legislation, for fear that this is merely the first step in liberals’ ultimate desire to completely ban guns. Which may be true on some level, but doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take incremental steps along the continuum of balancing the competing goals of public safety versus individual gun rights. No matter whose ox gets gored.

            And so it is with teen girls and Plan B.

  13. jjamele May 3, 2013 at 12:14 pm #

    Ogenec, apparently that’s exactly what it means. The Republicans are seen to be in a “War on Women,” therefore we should respond by making condoms and morning-after pills available to children. Frankly, you’ve responded to the level of condescension (“your child is becoming a woman…strap in…”)here far better than I would have.

  14. Taylor Marsh May 3, 2013 at 3:12 pm #

    level of condescension…”

    jjamele – Since I’ve done more research than anyone in this thread and most opining on the subject, I can say for certain that it’s not even close to condescension when someone deems young teen girls as individuals where their sexuality is concerned.

    Giving teen girls respect is what they are due, because the decision to have sex or not lies with them, no one else.

    It’s why protection on all levels, especially through public policy, where Obama failed, needs to be in place. Parents often overestimate their power and the right they have to control something that happens well outside of their purview. Parents also underestimate what respect and teaching young teens they have their lives in their hands can do for them.

    spincitysd May 3, 2013 at 11:51 am

    Nice work.

    The entire thread has been terrific to read.

  15. secularhumanizinevoluter May 3, 2013 at 6:09 pm #

    This entire arguement about the over the counter availability of plan B is only relevant if you accept the utter nonsense that girls….women….boys….men are going to wait till they are married before having sex. Kinda like Palin’s daughter did after her abstinence only classes. And frankly….I know it’s not popular to say anymore…but the vast majority of the opposition is centered around forcing children/young people live by the religious precepts…at least the ones the parents TELL the kids to do…not necessarily the ones they live by. News flash……DELUSSION!!!!!!!!! How about we start dealing with the reality based universe and help prevent unwanted pregnancies…period.

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong