Should "Morning After" pregnancy preventative be available without prescription?

From a medical study of Plan B.

No bc method is 100% effective. If you didn't bleed in the requesite number of days (as it tells you in the insert in the package) you need to see a doctor immediately. (As it also says in the insert.) If you were still pregnant, you would not have gotten a period the next month, which was a FLAG to see a doctor immediately. Waiting three months was really too long. It wasn't Plan B's fault. As in all medications, the user is responsible for getting medical attention if what happens after the medication is taken is unusual.

Various studies have shown that this medication is not "abused" or overused by most people.

I am sorry you had four birth control failures in one act of intercourse. But I think most people would agree this is an EXTREMELY unusual situation. TWO forums of BC, plus withdrawal, plus using Plan B, according to the directions, and you still got pregnant. This is very unusual, and the drug or it's availability was not to blame.

 

I'm no doctor, but I can smell a false analogy from a mile away.

You can't compare a naturally fluctuating hormone to one that is relatively stable.

It's the equivalent of saying that because Morphine is prescription only, cough medecine shouldn't be over the counter.

 

I think for someone that is on birth control, and maybe forgot a pill or is worried because she took the pill late, then, yes, it should be available.
But, this does seem like an excuse for some of the younger generation....those who have sex but are too afraid to ask their mother or trustable adult to take the for birth control, as an easy way to have sex and then be able to get a pill to make them feel better about it.
So, I'm for it....for those responsible enough. But, against it for those who are irrisponsible.

 

I think what you term as the "irresponsible" need it the most. Wouldn't you think? Denying it to them would be a travesty IMO.

 

I mean irresponsible as in people like my younger sister. She once told me that if she could get the morning after pill as easily as she could get Starburst candy she'd have unprotected sex all the time and just take the pill....just so she wouldn't have to burden herself or her sex partner with the pull-out method or having to use a condom. I think if a teen girl is ready to have sex, she should be responsible enough to be put on birthcontrol. It doesn't have to be her mother or even a relative to take her....just someone she trusts. If not, she shouldn't be having sex.
If she cannot do that, she should have to deal with the consequences.

 

After taking the pill once she would be in no hurry to take it again, regardless of what she thinks she would do now.

 

Yes, three days of puking, several weeks of bloating and the bleeding is not something most people want to do every month. She'd be better off on the regular BC pill, or a patch or the Nuvaring. Maybe she would do better with Depo, because she doesn't have to do anything except get an injection every 12 weeks.

She actually said that? She must be clueless about how this drug works. No one who takes it once will even consider taking it "every time" they have sex. I've never heard anyone say anything like this before. Maybe she needs to go to some classes at Planned Parenthood to learn about birth control and how to use it.

 

Yes, she actually said that. She's clueless....just someone who has sex because it's 'cool'.
I heard that pill did bad things to you....I had no idea it did THAT much.

 

Not everyone pukes, but many womyn do. It is just taking about 6 or more days of high dose birth control pills in a few days. Not pleasant, but the side effects are short lived, and less than what you get when you are pregnant, most of the time.

 

Wow...Maybe it needs to be explained to your sister that pregnancy isn't the only thing one can catch from unprotected sex.

 

I think it should be available to any girl who wants it.

 

Yeah, no kidding...

Once my step-sister was advocating to my younger (still virgin) sister how sex was so much better without condoms, how she prefers unprotected sec, ect... Well, needless to say we had words (some very loud ones) about that one (encouraging my little sister to not use condoms...pfft...). Sex isn't better when you got some itchy smelly goo seeping out of your vagina, or warts down there, or if you are dying from an incurable disease...

 

im for the pill,some might oppose?as for me i think its a very good alternative to have out there......but as any meds. do your research first!!!

 

I vote yes. No question about it.

 

Great news Wallmart is now selling the morning after pill in their pharmacy section! Goodbye unwanted pregnacies.

The morning after pill also took a huge hit to the goverments credibility. The FDA had proven it is safe, but the govermental pressure kept them from giving it an ok. Just goes to show we arn't as enlightend as we should be.

 

thats why its up to you to do the research/learn the pros and cons before taking any meds....you can look up anything on the internet,u just didnt take the time to get informed.so next time lucyinthesky do your homework! your body is a temple,treat it as so..............

 

Its certainly not a nice thing to take, I got really bad nausea the first time I took it, and the 2cnd time which was a few months ago, I got a really bad headache.

 

The only problem I have with it is that a girl under 14 could take it and she might not even fully understand what it's for or if it's for her. (You wouldn't believe the stuff that young girls think of lol.) I don't think they've ironed all the kniks out and what if the medicine turns out to be dangerous and causes said girl to lose the abilty to ovulate? I think that is should be doled but in moderation and the age limit be 15 or older.

 

It's JUST a birth control pill, it has been on the market since 1960. It does not and cannot cause a womyn to lose the ability to ovulate.

IMO, most 14 year old girls who are having sex "might not even fully understand what it's for or if it's for her." But, this drug, whether she understands it or not, is better than a 14 year old getting pregnant.

No one, who isn't having sex, will be taking this drug. IMO, Fourteen is way too young for sex, but my opinion, nor anyone else's will stop some young people from doing it. Better pregnancies don't occur anyway.

 

"Pregnancy" (a condition of the mother, not the unborn child) might begin at implantation, but the new life within her begins at conception:

"It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoa and the resulting mingling of the chromosomal material each brings to the union that culminates the process of fertilization and initiates the life of a new individual. Every one of the higher animals starts life as a single cell the fertilized ovum. The union of two such sex cells to form a zygote constitutes the process of fertilization and initiates the life of a new individual."
Bradley M. Patten, M.D. (3rd Edition, 1968), New York City: McGraw-Hill.

"The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual."
Leslie Arey. (7th Edition, 1974). Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers.

"Zygote. This cell results from fertilization of an oocyte by a sperm and is the beginning of a human being ... Development begins at fertilization, when a sperm unites with an oocyte to form a zygote. Each of us started life as a cell called a zygote."
K.L. Moore. (2nd Ed., 1977). Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers. Pages 1 and 12.

"The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. It is synonymous with the terms fecundation, impregnation, and fertilization ... The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life."
J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Freidman. . Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers. Pages 17 and 23.

"A human being develops from a mass of living material no larger than a pinhead, material contributed by both parents and capable of living and growing for a lifetime ... This genetic makeup was established at the beginning of your life, when a haploid egg and a haploid sperm combined to produce a diploid zygote, your first somatic cell."
J.H. Otto and A. Towle. . New York City: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 1969.

"The zygote is the starting cell of the new individual."
Salvadore E. Luria, M.D. <36 Lectures in Biology>. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Press, 1975, page 146.

"It is widely accepted and widely taught that human beings as well as other organisms reproducing by sexual reproduction …this is nothing unique to humans; this is a general biological principle ..start their existence at the time of conception or fertilization, as a single cell, the zygote."
Micheline M. Mathews-Roth, M.D., Harvard Medical School, quoted in the , 97th Congress, 1st Session, April 23, 1981.

"Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite, a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."
E.L. Potter, M.D., and J.M. Craig, M.D. ., 3rd Edition. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975, page vii.

"Based on my education and background, therefore, I believe that from the moment of the union of the sperm and the egg in the human species, there is present a new living human being. The human life is there from the moment of fertilization, and its very essence starts early but is not completed until the second decade of life. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood, and that interruption at any point constitutes termination of human life."
Alfred M. Bongiovanni, M.D., University of Pennsylvania Medical Professor, before the Senate Judiciary Committee, April 24, 1981.

"Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being, a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings ... Those witnesses who testified that science cannot say whether unborn children are human beings were speaking in every instance to the value question rather than the scientific question. No witness raised any evidence to refute the biological fact that from the moment of human conception there exists a distinct individual being who is alive and is of the human species."
Report of the Senate Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to the Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981, page 7.

"Since the old ethic has not yet been fully displaced, it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing, which continues to be socially abhorrent. The result has been a curious avoidance of the scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous, whether intra- or extra- uterine, until death. The very considerable semantic gymnastics which are required to rationalize abortion as anything but taking a human life would be ludicrous if they were not often put forth under socially impeccable auspices."
A New Ethic for Medicine and Society, California Medicine, 113 67, 68 (1970).