FDA approves morning after pill for over the counter!

[irishgrl]

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

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

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]

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. It used to be a much higher dose of hormones, so that's why I ask.

[JazmenFlowers]

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]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

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

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

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

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

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

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]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

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. 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]

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]

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.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

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]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

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]

^^

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]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

^^

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.

I actually listened to my old cassette tape and transcribed George's lil diatribe on abortion (My typing skills arent the greatest, but I do get by.)

[jannieC]

Originally Posted by skcin

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. 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.

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Some women are extremely fertile no matter what method they use 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?