FDA approves morning after pill for over the counter! [Archive]

irishgrl

08-24-2006, 01:54 PM

FDA OKs wider access for Plan B pill By Lisa Richwine
Thu Aug 24, 10:30 AM ET

Adult women can buy a "morning-after" contraceptive without a prescription, U.S. health officials said on Thursday after a three-year political battle over wider access.

Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc.'s (NYSE:BRL - news) Plan B must stay behind pharmacy counters, the Food and Drug Administration said. Women must show proof they are at least 18 to buy the emergency contraceptive pills without a prescription, and younger girls still need a doctor's order.

"When used as directed, Plan B effectively and safely prevents pregnancy," the FDA said in a statement.

Backers and opponents had fiercely lobbied the agency with arguments about Plan B's impact on abortion rates and teen sex, and the feud stalled the nominations of two FDA commissioners.

Two Plan B pills can prevent pregnancy when taken within 72 hours of sexual intercourse.

Women's groups and other supporters argued easier access would reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions. Conservative opponents said wider availability would lead to more teen-age promiscuity and sexually transmitted diseases.

Barr agreed to monitor enforcement of the age limit and to limit Plan B's distribution to health clinics and stores with pharmacies, the FDA said. The pills should be available in dual nonprescription and prescription packages by the end of the year. Prescription packages are available now.

"While we still feel that Plan B should be available to a broader age group without a prescription, we are pleased that the agency has determined that Plan B is safe and effective for use by those 18 years of age and older as an over-the-counter product," Barr Chief Executive Bruce Downey said in a statement.

The company originally had sought permission to sell Plan B over the counter without age limits.

Throughout the process, two Democratic senators blocked votes on President George W. Bush's nominees to run the FDA.

After the FDA decision, Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York dropped their objections to a Senate vote on the confirmation of Bush's current pick, acting FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, a Murray spokeswoman said.

Since Barr's initial bid in April 2003 to allow sales of the contraceptive without a prescription, repeated delays sparked charges that the FDA let politics override science.

In December 2003, a panel of outside advisers voted 23-4 to recommend switching Plan B from a prescription to over-the-counter drug. FDA staff scientists agreed, but a senior official rejected approval over concerns that young girls might not be able to use the pills safely.

Barr submitted a new bid for over-the-counter sales to females 16 and older. The FDA deferred a decision on that plan and last month proposed the 18-and-older scenario.

Plan B pills contain higher doses of progestin, a hormone used in prescription birth-control pills. Women are supposed to take two tablets 12 hours apart.

The pills block the release or fertilization of an egg. Some research suggests Plan B also may keep a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb, and some opponents considered that mechanism equal to an abortion.

Plan B is different from RU-486, a pill that causes an abortion early in pregnancy by blocking the hormone that keeps a fertilized egg implanted in the uterus. RU-486 also is known as Mifeprex or mifepristone.

Shares of Barr, which is based in Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey, rose $1.03, or 1.8 percent, to $59 in morning New York Stock Exchange trade.

(Additional reporting by Susan Heavey)

amber

08-24-2006, 02:04 PM

Well, Hallelujah! The Christian right is strong, but the pharmaceutical lobby is stronger. Which is favorable in this instance.

That is pretty convenient. :blob2:

hayley

08-24-2006, 02:23 PM

Oh, good. I ****ed like ten guys the other night at the Def Leppard/Journey concert out on the lawn, and I'd left the condoms out in the truck. Then again, I only had eight of them so I guess it wouldn't have mattered anyways.

I was gonna douche with coca-cola, I read in one of those awesome emails that I get forwarded that it works like a charm. But now this makes it way easier for next time.

strandinthewind

08-24-2006, 02:27 PM

Oh, good. I ****ed like ten guys the other night at the Def Leppard/Journey concert out on the lawn, . . . .

That was you :eek: I had a great time :wavey: :p

hayley

08-24-2006, 02:32 PM

That was you :eek: I had a great time :wavey: :p

Which one were you? If you were the one with the Billy Squier t-shirt who kept repeating lines from "The Stroke" while we were rolling around, there is no way I'm calling YOU back.

strandinthewind

08-24-2006, 02:35 PM

Which one were you? If you were the one with the Billy Squier t-shirt who kept repeating lines from "The Stroke" while we were rolling around, there is no way I'm calling YOU back.

Well, there was no way you were gonna simmer down :cool:

carrie721

08-24-2006, 02:45 PM

this is good news!

estranged4life

08-24-2006, 02:48 PM

amber

08-24-2006, 02:51 PM

this is good news!

I agree, but...um...you won't really ever need this. :laugh: I think it's funny that people presume that it would only be needed in the event that someone was promiscuous or stupid. I mean, I'm sure married people who don't want kids right now, and people who just sleep with one person, and all kinds of non slutty people use it. Not that I approve of the term "slut" to describe anyone, what people do is their own business, and who they sleep with doesn't affect me. And god bless anyone who chooses not to have a child when they shouldn't, or don't want to. Any population growth reduction is A-okay in my book.

carrie721

08-24-2006, 02:56 PM

I agree, but...um...you won't really ever need this. :laugh: I think it's funny that people presume that it would only be needed in the event that someone was promiscuous or stupid. I mean, I'm sure married people who don't want kids right now, and people who just sleep with one person, and all kinds of non slutty people use it. Not that I approve of the term "slut" to describe anyone, what people do is their own business, and who they sleep with doesn't affect me. And god bless anyone who chooses not to have a child when they shouldn't, or don't want to. Any population growth reduction is A-okay in my book.

hee. yeah, you're right about that. but y'know ... i could get really drunk one night and ...

ok, still probably not. :laugh:

i agree. i'm sure there is a huge non-"slut" market out there for this drug.

irishgrl

08-24-2006, 03:14 PM

I dont know about any of youse guys, but I was very surprised this passed! Bushwhacker has filled all the key positions with anti-choice people so there musta been some MAJOR pull from the more liberal sector somehow...

'course, I know the pill companies like this idea but they arent going to be selling all THAT many pills compared to heartburn medicine or depression medicine or something like that...this isnt going to be a real huge money maker for them so Im just surprised all around that it passed. Anyway, its a HUGE victory for women's rights issues (autonomy and all that) so, that MY big thing.

DavidMn

08-24-2006, 03:32 PM

mikeschmike

08-24-2006, 03:34 PM

I was gonna douche with coca-cola, I read in one of those awesome emails that I get forwarded that it works like a charm. But now this makes it way easier for next time.

Just stay away from Mentos. your junk will explode!:laugh:

DavidMn

08-24-2006, 03:38 PM

Just stay away from Mentos. your junk will explode!:laugh:INteresting visual there....:lol:

skcin

08-24-2006, 03:39 PM

Great news for our clinic. I can't tell you how much time we waste on people wanting the MAP, when other (sick, injured) kids could be seen instead in that appointment slot.

In general, most people use it once in a while, they usually say the condom breaks. I must say, I've never had a condom break during sex, so they must be doing something wrong with it if it happens often. :rolleyes: A few women come in pretty frequently, which is probably not the best thing. But in reality, studies have not shown any physical complications from using it too often. I personally wouldn't want to keep ingesting large amounts of hormones, but hey - it's their body. :shrug:

jannieC

08-24-2006, 06:58 PM

I don't understand- why not just use birth control in the first place? :shrug:

carrie721

08-24-2006, 07:09 PM

I don't understand- why not just use birth control in the first place? :shrug:

1) rape
2) accidents happen
3) birth control isn't 100% effective

jannieC

08-24-2006, 07:22 PM

1) rape
2) accidents happen
3) birth control isn't 100% effective

I'm not talking about rape- I'm talking about using it as a form of birth control. I was raped and was given the morning after pill- it's not pleasant.

DrummerDeanna

08-24-2006, 07:25 PM

1) rape
2) accidents happen
3) birth control isn't 100% effective

Birth control IS like 99.9% effective if taken correctly.

So if you're on the pill the accidents happen and rape excused don't fly.

I was wondering the same thing...why not just take the pill in the first place? But whatever.

This will not come without a fight -many groups are already looking to fight this.

Of course Planned Parenthood is also fighting - to get unlimited access. I gotta say - are they EVER happy. I'm sorry but as much as I believe in choice I don't think this should be readily available to minors.

jannieC

08-24-2006, 07:27 PM

Birth control IS like 99.9% effective if taken correctly.

So if you're on the pill the accidents happen and rape excused don't fly.

I was wondering the same thing...why not just take the pill in the first place? But whatever.

This will not come without a fight -many groups are already looking to fight this.

Of course Planned Parenthood is also fighting - to get unlimited access. I gotta say - are they EVER happy. I'm sorry but as much as I believe in choice I don't think this should be readily available to minors.

It's been available to rape victims for years. I completely agree with everything you've said. We have the choice to prevent pregnancy BEFORE we have sex. Maybe it will help in cases of incest, etc but I doubt it because a girl who gets pregnant by a relative is probably not going to get to the doctor the day after.

Edit: I am totally pro-choice- I just think that women should be more responsible in PREVENTING pregnancy.

carrie721

08-24-2006, 07:36 PM

I'm not talking about rape- I'm talking about using it as a form of birth control. I was raped and was given the morning after pill- it's not pleasant.

oh. well, you didn't clarify. the effects of the pill aren't pleasant? maybe so, but i guess that's the person's choice.

Birth control IS like 99.9% effective if taken correctly.

So if you're on the pill the accidents happen and rape excused don't fly.

I was wondering the same thing...why not just take the pill in the first place? But whatever.

This will not come without a fight -many groups are already looking to fight this.

Of course Planned Parenthood is also fighting - to get unlimited access. I gotta say - are they EVER happy. I'm sorry but as much as I believe in choice I don't think this should be readily available to minors.

BC pill or no BC pill, if i were raped, i would want to take the morning after pill anyway. BC pills can have bad effects on people - it is not a solution for everyone. condoms break, etc (and this is what i was talking about when i said "accidents happen." not, oops, i had unprotected sex!). either way, i don't care whether people take preventative measures or not - it's not my body. also, there is a difference between 100% and 99.9%.

EDIT: i should qualify my statement about not caring whether people take preventative measures or not. i think almost everyone should use some form of BC. people need to stop having babies in general. but i guess when it comes down to it, i don't care if people stop a pregnancy the night before or the morning after, just as long as it happens.

DrummerDeanna

08-24-2006, 07:38 PM

It's been available to rape victims for years. I completely agree with everything you've said. We have the choice to prevent pregnancy BEFORE we have sex. Maybe it will help in cases of incest, etc but I doubt it because a girl who gets pregnant by a relative is probably not going to get to the doctor the day after.

Edit: I am totally pro-choice- I just think that women should be more responsible in PREVENTING pregnancy.

Right - now I don't mean to imply that all women should take the pill in case they get raped - I hope it didn't come across that way.

I just heard thought that even kids under age 17 can't get this pill AT ALL...parents or not - that I do not agree with because of cases of incest and rape.

Another stitch in this whole thing is the MAP will be behind pharmacy counters - and pharmacists can refuse to sell it based on moral reasons - which is not cool in my opinion.

Anyway - I agree, I wish more women would be more proactive in preventing pregnancy - it's really pretty easy to NOT get pregnant.

carrie721

08-24-2006, 07:39 PM

according to planned parenthood (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/birthcontrol/pub-contraception-pill.xml#1097889802325::-1797964069978546334):

The pill is one of the most effective reversible methods of birth control. Of 100 women who use the pill, only eight will become pregnant during the first year of typical use.* Fewer than one will become pregnant with perfect use.**

* Typical use refers to failure rates for use that is not consistent or always correct.
** Perfect use refers to failure rates for use that is consistent and always correct.

carrie721

08-24-2006, 07:41 PM

Anyway - I agree, I wish more women would be more proactive in preventing pregnancy - it's really pretty easy to NOT get pregnant.

i agree about that. it's pretty easy. the problem is, there are a lot of stupid people out there ... i'm just glad there's another way to stop them from procreating. :laugh:

irishgrl

08-24-2006, 10:09 PM

I'm sorry but as much as I believe in choice I don't think this should be readily available to minors.

It ISNT readily available to minors. Only adult Women have the ability to buy this w/o an RX. Minors still have to get an RX, and parents usually know about this. I agree with Planned Parenthood however that there ARE cases in which the parents knowing would be devastating for the minor and that in those cases, it should be available IMO. I know from the research Ive done that often times, these minors are either the victims of incest or their family dynamics are such that if they disclosed their pregnancy to their family, they'd be out on the street. Sad but true. Teen pregnancies have decreased but they havent gone away altogether and with the current evangelical fervor gripping the country, Im inclined to let these poor gals get the pill. The alternative (having a baby they're ill-equipped to raise) is even worse IMO.

irishgrl

08-24-2006, 10:11 PM

Edit: I am totally pro-choice- I just think that women should be more responsible in PREVENTING pregnancy.

Most women ARE~! but again, you can get pregnant on any birth control method. Some women are extremely fertile no matter what method they use :shrug: my mother and my sister and even myself all got pregnant on the pill.

estranged4life

08-24-2006, 10:19 PM

U.S. Senator Tom "Dr.Death" Coburn (R-tard from Muskogee, Gee how could such an asshole come from my hometown) is equating that availibility of this drug being over-the-counter, will be as if a woman could walk into a convienence store & purchase a 6 six pack of alcohol.

The local OKC news has stated that pharmacists in Oklahoma do not have to fill the prescription for the morning after pill, if they feel it is against their moral beliefs. Yet another dumb law on the Oklahoma books...Gee, isnt it any wonder that Oklahoma is constantly #1 of the United States in teen pregnancy.

Wal-Mart & CVS pharmacies have yet to decide if they will carry the pill, Walgreens does carry it, but again it is at the discretion of the pharmacist to determine if the prescription will be filled.

Trivial question: What is the most "Conservative city" in the US? Hint, the city has the letters O-K-C in its name.

sparky

08-24-2006, 11:30 PM

I personally wouldn't want to keep ingesting large amounts of hormones, but hey - it's their body. :shrug:

Well evidently they can't keep the sperm outta their bodies, so what's a few hormones, right ?:wavey:

amber

08-25-2006, 12:30 AM

I know a lot of girls who don't want to take birth control regularly, it messes with their body. I'm not one of those girls, luckily, but if I was I wouldn't want to take the pill either.

So, if they have an accident, the morning after pill is great. It would be awesome if everyone was 100% responsible all the time, but that just isn't the case. Also, there are people who maybe have unexpected sexual encounters a few times a year or something. So, again, in case of accidents, this is ideal for them.

I really don't get what the judgment is about, honestly. Take birth control before, or after, so what's the diff? And the m.o.p. doesn't end pregnancy, it prevents the egg from being fertilized, just like regular b.c.p.'s.

So, if women aren't more responsible in preventing pregnancy before they have sex, which they aren't, no matter how much you want them to be - I'd rather they have this than an abortion or unwanted child. You can say all you want what people should do, but the bottom line is that they don't, and I think this is a real boon. Also, again, taking the m.o.p. is taking precautions before pregnancy - it prevents fertilization.

Also, I've taken it and haven't had any averse affects. But, everyone's body is different, which goes great for my argument of why some girls don't like to take the pill regularly.
Also, as an aside, I don't like to morally regulate sexuality. And I think taking the m.a.p. is being proactive. And let me tell you, getting a prescription within 72 hours can be a pain in the a**.
oops, I was writing "mop" instead of "map", which is kind of funny if you think about it.

carrie721

08-25-2006, 01:00 AM

oops, I was writing "mop" instead of "map", which is kind of funny if you think about it.

i was thinking, maybe she's saying 'morning OF pill,' because, y'know... morning sex is nice, too. :laugh:

irishgrl

08-25-2006, 06:16 AM

The preceding was some of the strangest postage I have yet seen in cyberspace. "calf porn" OY.

SuzeQuze

08-25-2006, 08:16 AM

It ISNT readily available to minors. Only adult Women have the ability to buy this w/o an RX. Minors still have to get an RX, and parents usually know about this. I agree with Planned Parenthood however that there ARE cases in which the parents knowing would be devastating for the minor and that in those cases, it should be available IMO. I know from the research Ive done that often times, these minors are either the victims of incest or their family dynamics are such that if they disclosed their pregnancy to their family, they'd be out on the street. Sad but true. Teen pregnancies have decreased but they havent gone away altogether and with the current evangelical fervor gripping the country, Im inclined to let these poor gals get the pill. The alternative (having a baby they're ill-equipped to raise) is even worse IMO.

The morning after pill prevents pregnancy so the girl would not be pregnant but will have had sex. And yes, in some families that cannot be disclosed without sever repercussions. The pill prevents a fertilized egg from embedding itself in the uterus. It is 75% effective.

skcin

08-25-2006, 09:54 AM

JazmenFlowers

08-25-2006, 09:55 AM

I'm so glad. especially after watching the special about botched abortions on 30 Days this week. while I am all about preventative measures, this is another choice for women to make, which is what pro-choice is all about. it all must be looked at on an individual basis. and yes, the "morning after" pill is not pleasant.

irishgrl

08-25-2006, 10:29 AM

The morning after pill prevents pregnancy so the girl would not be pregnant but will have had sex. And yes, in some families that cannot be disclosed without sever repercussions. The pill prevents a fertilized egg from embedding itself in the uterus. It is 75% effective.

Suze, I was talking about "pregnancy" in the event these teen moms DIDNT have access to the m.a.p. or a clinic. Teens are the biggest group affected by this legislation IMO, because they have no voice really. I cant understand why the far right is so hell-bent on CONTROLLING the rest of the nation, as if we must all march lockstep with THEIR moral code......it makes me sick :mad:

SuzeQuze

08-25-2006, 10:30 AM

Suze, I was talking about "pregnancy" in the event these teen moms DIDNT have access to the m.a.p. or a clinic. Teens are the biggest group affected by this legislation IMO, because they have no voice really. I cant understand why the far right is so hell-bent on CONTROLLING the rest of the nation, as if we must all march lockstep with THEIR moral code......it makes me sick :mad:

Ah, got ya. It really sucks how much "morality" is pushed onto people. Where is that freedom we are always hearing about?

strandinthewind

08-25-2006, 11:08 AM

Ah, got ya. It really sucks how much "morality" is pushed onto people. Where is that freedom we are always hearing about?

Well, their argument is the fetus, zygote, etc. is a life from the moment of conception and that life has freedoms which must be protected as well. Interestingly, the Court in Roe agreed with this line of thinking. But, in Roe, the Court held that the state's interest in protecting the life of the unborn outweighs the mother's right to privacy only when the fetus is viable outside of the womb, which the Court after a long discussion found was after the first trimester.

Roe really was a landmark case in many ways, the least of which was expanding a right not specifically found in the Const.

SuzeQuze

08-25-2006, 11:17 AM

Well, their argument is the fetus, zygote, etc. is a life from the moment of conception and that life has freedoms which must be protected as well. Interestingly, the Court in Roe agreed with this line of thinking. But, in Roe, the Court held that the state's interest in protecting the life of the unborn outweighs the mother's right to privacy only when the fetus is viable outside of the womb, which the Court after a long discussion found was after the first trimester.

Roe really was a landmark case in many ways, the least of which was expanding a right not specifically found in the Const.

If men got pregnant there would be no such argument and you'd be able to get the morning after pill in the candy aisle. :lol: JK, I would argue that since the fetus is wholly dependent on its mother's body it is up to her to choose.

Is a fertilized egg even a zygote? I don't think it is yet.

irishgrl

08-25-2006, 01:13 PM

If men got pregnant there would be no such argument and you'd be able to get the morning after pill in the candy aisle.
no joke I have that as a bumper sticker (If men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament)

JK, I would argue that since the fetus is wholly dependent on its mother's body it is up to her to choose.

YES! and there you have it in a nutshell folks, without a host body for the developing fetus to draw from it would be dead. And I can remember a compelling argument by Anne Quinlan that said the rights of the already living outweigh the rights of the not yet born. I happen to agree.

Is a fertilized egg even a zygote? I don't think it is yet.

I found this:

In organisms that reproduce sexually, once a sperm fertilizes an egg cell, the result is a cell called the zygote that has all the DNA of two parents. In plants, animals, and some protists, the zygote will begin to divide by mitosis to produce a multicellular organism. The term embryo refers to the early stages of this development, after the zygote has divided at least once, but before the process has completed to produce the next stage of development.

In animals, the development of the zygote into an embryo proceeds through specific recognizable stages of morula, blastula, and gastrula. This process involves the creating of a hollow sphere of cells in which three tissue layers develop. In plants. the process is not so standard. The stages of embryo development in plants is more dependent upon the kind of plant being produced.

btw, Im not biting Jason, we've already gone round and round about whether the Supremes did in fact "create" new law by lumping privacy with other rights.

DrummerDeanna

08-25-2006, 01:31 PM

irishgrl

08-25-2006, 01:36 PM

I still find it amusing (in a sad kind of way) that the Religious Right and Conservatives get all up in arms about a freaking egg and sperm but once a kid is born - it's fend for yourself of die....they don't care about actual people.

Truly ironic, I agree. And all of the social programs that were put into place to take care of these children (and their parental caregivers) have been systematically gutted and restricted. Its hypocritical as is the majority of the message that has been spewed by the Religious Right.

estranged4life

08-25-2006, 02:27 PM

I still find it amusing (in a sad kind of way) that the Religious Right and Conservatives get all up in arms about a freaking egg and sperm but once a kid is born - it's fend for yourself of die....they don't care about actual people.

"Boy, these Conservatives are really something arent they? They're all in favor of the unborn, They will do anything for the unborn, but once your born you're on your own (Flips the middle finger).

Pro-life Conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months, after that they don't wanna know about you, they don't wanna hear from you. No nothing. No neo-natal care, No daycare, No headstart, No school lunch, No foodstamps, No welfare, No nothing. If you're pre-born your fine, if you're pre-school your f**ked! You're f**ked!

Conservatives don't give a **** about you, until you reach...Military age. Then they think you are just fine, Just what they been looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers...Pro-life, pro-life...These people arent pro-life, they are killing doctors. What kind of pro-life is that? What, they will do anything they can to save a fetus but if it grows up to be a Doctor they may just have to kill it?

They're not pro-life, you know what they are? They're anti-WOMAN. It's as simple as it gets...Anti-WOMAN, they don't like 'em. They dont like women.

They believe a woman's primary role is to function as a broodmare for the state. Pro-life. You don't see many of these white anti-abortion women volunteering to have any black fetuses transplanted into their uteruses do ya? No, You don't see 'em adopting alot of crack babies, do ya? Nah, that might be something Christ would do.

And...you won't see, you won't see alot of these of these pro-life people dousing themselves in karosene and lighting themselves on fire. You know morally committed religious people in South Vietnam knew how to stage a God-damned demonstration didnt they? Huh?

Hey, They knew how to put on a f**king protest. "Light yourself on fire"!!! C'mon you moral crusaders lets see a little smoke. To match the fire in your belly.

Here's another question I have, Why when it is us it is an abortion, and with a chicken it's an omelet?"-George Carlin "Back in Town" 1996

Brian "why why why, why is it, that most of the people who are against abortion, are people you wouldnt want to f**k in the first place-George Carlin 1996 "Back in Town" j.

DrummerDeanna

08-25-2006, 02:32 PM

^^

Yes! Thanks for finding that - I knew he'd done something on this issue - oh how I love George Carlin! He's so spot on though....!

I love the people in this argument saying the pill will help REDUCE abortions! But no - the right will have none of that - and say the left is putting the pill on their abortion platform.

It's maddening...maddening - and really does fit more with an anti-woman stance than an anti-abortion one.

estranged4life

08-25-2006, 02:35 PM

jannieC

08-25-2006, 02:45 PM

Jannie - did you take it a while ago? I don't want to be nosy, I'm just curious, because we rarely hear complaints about side effects in our clinic, usually just irreg. periods & some nausea. :shrug: It used to be a much higher dose of hormones, so that's why I ask.

It was 17 years ago. And of course I don't think you're nosy; I put it out there to begin with. After all these years, I have no shame about it.

I do want to add that I am not thinking that the m.a.p. is like, killing an embryo or anything. I just wonder if this pill will make planning beforehand obsolete. I definitely do not believe that MOST young women are responsible with birth control. It just seems to me that this is like a quick fix on something that could have been prevented in the first place. But, if I had to vote on it, I would vote FOR it- only because I am totally pro-choice and wouldn't want to ever hurt our freedom.

Some women are extremely fertile no matter what method they use :shrug: my mother and my sister and even myself all got pregnant on the pill.
So with this rationale, a very fertile woman should be on birth control but take the m.a.p. every time she has sex- just in case?

DrummerDeanna

08-25-2006, 02:52 PM

It was 17 years ago. And of course I don't think you're nosy; I put it out there to begin with. After all these years, I have no shame about it.

I do want to add that I am not thinking that the m.a.p. is like, killing an embryo or anything. I just wonder if this pill will make planning beforehand obsolete. I definitely do not believe that MOST young women are responsible with birth control. It just seems to me that this is like a quick fix on something that could have been prevented in the first place. But, if I had to vote on it, I would vote FOR it- only because I am totally pro-choice and wouldn't want to ever hurt our freedom.

Wow - thanks for putting that out there - very courageous of you! And so may people even after many many years still feel ashamed about things like that and good for you for not!

As per the second paragraph I was wondering the same thing - if a wider availability of this pill will lead to more irresponsible behaviour. BUT I don't think it will - I mean if someone was irresponsible before they will still be now - at least now they have an option BEFORE they get impregnated.

I'm with you though - through any of my reservations I'm still glad this decision was made - because it's not my place to decide how any other woman should treat her body.

hayley

08-25-2006, 03:03 PM

strandinthewind

08-25-2006, 03:07 PM

. . . I would argue that since the fetus is wholly dependent on its mother's body it is up to her to choose . . . .

And, the Court agrees with you up until the end of the first tri-mester.

Interestingly, the fetus is dependent on the mother until birth. So, using that logic, the mother could abort while delivering :shrug: Also, when you get down to it, the baby depends wholly on its mother or some other human (assuming one is around and has milk) for life for the next three to five years after that.

In the end, I think until self viability earlier than the first trimester can be demonstrated through medical advances, Roe will stand.

I also think the vast majority of Americans are for Roe and the right to choose, though many would choose life. I do think, however, Roe could fall if the religious right wins its carefully waged war by making the so called BS issues the subject of elections. For example, very few Americans think a 12 year old girl ought to have an abortion without telling her parents, especially considering they would need parental consent for any other voluntary surgery. So, if the religious right puts that issue out there in an election, they will take many of the pro choice people with them because of that issue. That will lead to the appointment of anti-Roe judges. To me, that is sad because likely so realtively few 12 year olds will not get an abortion, etc., when compared to the thousands of other abortions that would not exist if Roe falls.

strandinthewind

08-25-2006, 03:12 PM

. . . I'm with you though - through any of my reservations I'm still glad this decision was made - because it's not my place to decide how any other woman should treat her body.

Exactly!!!!!

And, to me, that applies in all areas. I think if you want to marry eight people - you ought to be able to marry eight people and the govt. should not be able to stop you. That would, of course, require the govt. to get out of the business of marriage, which is very lucrative come election time.

SuzeQuze

08-25-2006, 03:16 PM

I had a friend who was raped when we were 15. By Kansas law, she was not allowed to walk into Planned Parenthood alone, let alone get the M.A.P. She was too afraid to tell her mom what had happened to her, so she didn't get the pill. She certainly did have to tell her mom once she realized she was pregnant and needed her permission for an abortion.

Even if it does make people more cavalier about their birth control, who cares? I'll take it, if it means that more people who genuinely need access to the morning after pill can get it.

That poor girl, that must have been such a nightmare.

If people try to use this as birth control they might be in for a rude awakening since it is only 75% effective. But I'm with you, if a few people are going to abuse it, I'll take that risk so that people who really need the drug can get it.

SuzeQuze

08-25-2006, 03:17 PM

Exactly!!!!!

And, to me, that applies in all areas. I think if you want to marry eight people - you ought to be able to marry eight people and the govt. should not be able to stop you. That would, of course, require the govt. to get out of the business of marriage, which is very lucrative come election time.

But where does it stop? Then we'll have people marrying animals... and trees! :rolleyes:

I'm so with you on this.

DrummerDeanna

08-25-2006, 03:22 PM

But where does it stop? Then we'll have people marrying animals... and trees! :rolleyes:

I'm so with you on this.

Have you seen the SNL skit where Alec Baldwin marries a hot dog? It's stupid but I found it way funny.

Anyway - this, like the gay marriage, issue largely comes down to religion. And that's not fair. I think abortion is awful and I wish there weren't any - BUT it's not up to me to tell personX they can't have an abortion because of MY beliefs. Same with contraception, or the M.A.P or gay marriage - I wish the Religious Right would stop trying to shove their beliefs and way of life into our laws.

strandinthewind

08-25-2006, 03:26 PM

I'm so with you on this.

I know :wavey:

SuzeQuze

08-25-2006, 03:27 PM

Have you seen the SNL skit where Alec Baldwin marries a hot dog? It's stupid but I found it way funny.

Anyway - this, like the gay marriage, issue largely comes down to religion. And that's not fair. I think abortion is awful and I wish there weren't any - BUT it's not up to me to tell personX they can't have an abortion because of MY beliefs. Same with contraception, or the M.A.P or gay marriage - I wish the Religious Right would stop trying to shove their beliefs and way of life into our laws.

No I haven't seen that. But I've seen him do other skits and he is really funny! Perhaps I can find it on YouTube.

The fact that the Religious Right has gained so much power in this country often seems like a bad dream to me. This in America? WTF? And they call a judge an activist for defending civil rights (as in the recent SC decision that the wire-tapping without a warrant was illegal). It's just nutso.

Honestly I think they have picked up on some brainwashing tactics. The talking points and buzzwords they use incite a visceral response and people just parrot them without thinking critically about them. They are also discouraged from thinking critically. I wonder if radical right Christianity will show up on Rick Ross's cult list.

irishgrl

08-25-2006, 03:39 PM

And, the Court agrees with you up until the end of the first tri-mester.

Interestingly, the fetus is dependent on the mother until birth. So, using that logic, the mother could abort while delivering :shrug: Also, when you get down to it, the baby depends wholly on its mother or some other human (assuming one is around and has milk) for life for the next three to five years after that.

In the end, I think until self viability earlier than the first trimester can be demonstrated through medical advances, Roe will stand.

I also think the vast majority of Americans are for Roe and the right to choose, though many would choose life. I do think, however, Roe could fall if the religious right wins its carefully waged war by making the so called BS issues the subject of elections. For example, very few Americans think a 12 year old girl ought to have an abortion without telling her parents, especially considering they would need parental consent for any other voluntary surgery. So, if the religious right puts that issue out there in an election, they will take many of the pro choice people with them because of that issue. That will lead to the appointment of anti-Roe judges. To me, that is sad because likely so realtively few 12 year olds will not get an abortion, etc., when compared to the thousands of other abortions that would not exist if Roe falls.

A fetus DOES depend upon its mother but the longer it develops the greater its chances of surviving outside the womb. Also, the developing fetus draws all it needs to develop from the mother's body which takes a toll on her, depending upon how healthy she is to begin with. For instance, if there is a chemical incompatibility between mother and fetus, the mother suffers greatly and her body may reject the fetus and spontaneously abort, or the mother can be ill the entire pregnancy. Some women lose teeth and/or hair. Two beings are living off of the resources of one body and it is for that reason that I believe the choice to continue a pregnancy is a very personal one for the MOTHER.

I can tell you that I was born at 24 weeks, and even at that I nearly didnt live--I was born at a time when preemie technology was so brand new, not every hospital had the right equipment. 24 weeks has been, and IMO, will continue to be the cutoff point at which babies can survive outside the womb with medical assistance. Any earlier than that, and the chances of death increase sharply. I hope you're right Jason about Roe surviving, but Im very afraid for its future.

The one bright spot is that Americans seem to be waking up across the nation to just how restrictive this Right Wing agenda is and are grumbling about a change in leadership. Lets hope this feeling gathers strength and carries us to a GOP defeat come November.

DrummerDeanna

08-25-2006, 03:39 PM

No I haven't seen that. But I've seen him do other skits and he is really funny! Perhaps I can find it on YouTube.

The fact that the Religious Right has gained so much power in this country often seems like a bad dream to me. This in America? WTF? And they call a judge an activist for defending civil rights (as in the recent SC decision that the wire-tapping without a warrant was illegal). It's just nutso.

Honestly I think they have picked up on some brainwashing tactics. The talking points and buzzwords they use incite a visceral response and people just parrot them without thinking critically about them. They are also discouraged from thinking critically. I wonder if radical right Christianity will show up on Rick Ross's cult list.

I don't know - but it scares the **** out of me. And it pisses me off because (as seen LOTS) ALL Christians get judged buy these wack-nuts -who don't even follow the very Christian doctrine they spew.

Jesus was a Jewish Liberal afterall....how would these folks deal with him...because they sure as hell don't like the people who are actually doing his work and following His path.

Jane Fonda had some great things to say on that in her book.

Anyway - there was this great commentary on NPR recently about a guy upset over a church sermon - the pastor was praising his new Mercedes - and talking about how Jesus can get you wealth....Um NOO! That's not how it works....
This pastor fired back a few days later saying he has to use practical application in his teachings - and apparently luxury cars and lots of riches fall under the "practical application" title. Whatever - it's disgusting and sad.

/rant.