re: #27 Simply Sarah

In a nutshell, you basically seem to feel that Plan B should be harder to get because you want to limit it as an ‘out’ for women having unprotected sex, in order to help prevent the spread of sexually transmitted infections and diseases. .

No, I feel that any discussion about Plan B should include all the facts. Not just one.

First, young women under 17 can still get Plan B now, under current rules. They just need a prescription or someone over 17 to purchase it. So right there, it doesn’t really prevent it from being used in the exact way you fear.

An accelerated prescription procedure (since Plan B’s effeciveness is reduced by delaying its administration) could be appropriate. The involvement of a parent/guardian with the healthcare of a minor child can be of benefit to the minor child. It is wrong to assume that every girl who might need Plan B does not have access to a parent/guardian with her best interests at heart.

Second, the pill and similar methods have the same problems as Plan B does, except they’re generally going to be much less expensive and more widely used. Sure, you can’t just start on the pill right before having sex and expect it to work, so limiting Plan B might discourage totally unexpected and random sexual encounters. But again, Plan B isn’t 17+. it’s just harder for people under 17 to get.

I agree to the extent that the pill presents similar issues. The pill is available by prescription, if I am not mistaken. It is also impossible to argue that unprotected sexual activity has not increased. So Plan B presents an opportunity to discuss these issues.

Third, you seem to agree that education is the real solution here. If that’s the case, then I think trying to make it harder to get Plan B doesn’t help so much, because it’s a nice way to excuse discussing why using it as Plan A is a bad idea. And, once again, you can still get it if you’re under 17.

I would rather educate parents and teens on the importance of condoms and safe sexual practices (and the real dangers of risky practices) than simply tell them that there is now a way to prevent unwanted pregnancy if they have unprotected sex. Because neither Plan B nor the pill will prevent the other possible outcomes I have discussed.

…you increase the risk for all those women, younger and older, that need Plan B due to something out of their control (Or even just them being dumb). These are health risks, too. I understand you want to discourage unsafe sex, but just as you say we can’t ignore the non-pregnancy risks of it, we also can’t ignore the pregnancy ones, either.

Your argument is slightly fallacious insofar as you keep focusing on pregnancy, and bever bother addressing any of the points I make about HIV, other STDs and cervical cancer. If you handed out the pill to all pubescent girls (or the male equivalent to boys), it would still not address the issue of unprotected sex or risky sexual practices. And these are real, documented problems, not arguments I am making up because I disapprove of pre-marital sex (I don’t) or contraception (ditto) or am anti-choice (I am not).

We can largely solve the “Plan B allows young women to have unsafe sex freely” issue through education. We can’t solve the problem of condoms breaking through education. since Plan B can be gotten by women over 17 without a prescription, they too can use it to practice unsafe sex.

Again, you address only pregnancy and are refusing to engage on the issues that are central to my original post.

your plan only works if we actually ban or highly restrict Plan B so that it’s nearly impossible to get, as that’s the only way the threat really comes into play.

I did not offer a plan. I suggested a rationale for a broader scope for the discussion. ID is a separate issue. There are many things for which ID is needed