Morning After Pill Now Available For 15 Year Olds

[alexava 6,974]

I get physically sick when thinking about s 10 or 11 year old in this situation. But at 15 give them the pill. I don't know what it does chemically, but i know what semen can do and its not what a 15 year old needs.

[ToomersRevenge 284]

Plan B is one pill. Hard to overdose or take too much of that, or be too stupid to figure it out. Some of them are two pills taken 12 hours apart.

The dose of these pills is high enough for an acute response to stop ovulation, but is in almost all cases not enough to causes serious reactions.

[AUDub 11,424]

Again, aside from the fact that a girl that young may not understand that dosages for medicine should be followed closely. She might, deciding on this all by herself with no doctor or adult helping, take two or three doses at one time thinking "if one dose works well, two doses will make doubly sure!" The maturity level isn't such that this is a good decision to leave in someone's hands that young at all.

This logic could also be applied to other OTC medicine like tylenol and even multivitamins. I think you make a fair case for the necessity of parental supervision in cases like this.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Again, aside from the fact that a girl that young may not understand that dosages for medicine should be followed closely. She might, deciding on this all by herself with no doctor or adult helping, take two or three doses at one time thinking "if one dose works well, two doses will make doubly sure!" The maturity level isn't such that this is a good decision to leave in someone's hands that young at all.

This logic could also be applied to other OTC medicine like tylenol and even multivitamins. I think you make a fair case for the necessity of parental supervision in cases like this.

True, but I think the level of motivation to purchase those things vs Plan B is vastly lower.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Plan B is one pill. Hard to overdose or take too much of that, or be too stupid to figure it out. Some of them are two pills taken 12 hours apart.

The dose of these pills is high enough for an acute response to stop ovulation, but is in almost all cases not enough to causes serious reactions.

Unless the kid, conspiring with an equally ignorant friend, decides to buy multiple doses.

[alexava 6,974]

Plan B is one pill. Hard to overdose org take too much of that, or be too stupid to figure it out. Some of them are two pills taken 12 hours apart.

The dose of these pills is high enough for an acute response to stop ovulation, but is in almost all cases not enough to causes serious reactions.

Unless the kid, conspiring with an equally ignorant friend, decides to buy multiple doses.

hopefully at 15 she can read.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Plan B is one pill. Hard to overdose org take too much of that, or be too stupid to figure it out. Some of them are two pills taken 12 hours apart.

The dose of these pills is high enough for an acute response to stop ovulation, but is in almost all cases not enough to causes serious reactions.

Unless the kid, conspiring with an equally ignorant friend, decides to buy multiple doses.

hopefully at 15 she can read.

A lot of people can read. They still erroneously think that if one works, two or three will work better or faster.

But we were discussing 10 or 11 year olds.

[AUcivE09 582]

I'm done trying to respond to you on this. I completely disagree with your approach. You (possibly) solve one problem while ignoring a whole host of others, IMO. And I'd rather the government not find one more way to insert itself into the parent-child relationship with their own values instead of ours. But we simply aren't going to agree on this.

The only thing I will rebut is this thing where you keep putting words into my mouth. I never said anything about Plan B causing kids to want to have sex. That's something you pulled out of your nether regions, not me.

Dont get all ticked off buddy. I completely respect your point of covering up rape. I just beleive that the relatively few cases where this would be an issue pales in comparison to providing something that has obvious benefits. No answer on here is going to cover the entire nation and gain 100% approval.

I can see where the family should have input on the situation, but that just causes a delay in an already short window where if the parents say "OK - time for Plan B" it is the same end result. Not to mention - you have to agree that teenage girls are insanely difficult. She has to be willing to talk for the family to help, and she has 72 hours to make up her mind.

I just have to wonder - do you see Plan B the same way as abortion?

[TitanTiger 20,708]

I only get ticked off when people tell me what I'm arguing when I know for a fact that I said no such thing.

To your last point, I'm not totally convinced the science has excluded the possible abortafacient effects of Plan B.

[AUcivE09 582]

My bad on the Plan B causes sex - I just could have sworn I had read where you said Plan B makes promiscuous behavior was ok. I went back and read - didnt see it.

I honestly figured most people would have a problem with this due to seeing it as abortion moreso than any of our debates. I am sure if this comes to fruition then we will read all the "Man forces rape victim to eat pill" or "Teen dies trying the Plan B challenge" but I would have to guess that "15 year old avoids pregnancy" probably isnt a click worthy link.

Kids could be seriously harmed just eating asprin - people figured out how to make a drug out of allergy meds - ever heard of "RoboTrip"? Point here is that these are all potentially harmful drugs sold over the counter that have more good qualities than bad. I kinda live by "for the greater good" and realize it may be a bit synical by the fact I am admitting I know some people would get hurt, but there is just no way to please everyone. If a girl decides to eat 5 because it is day 4 I would chalk it up to Darwinism until it becomes a LARGE issue (i.e. ephedrine - lots of kids died before they put it behind the counter).

I agree the best way is for the family to handle these situation together and keep a higher age on the drug - I am just not convinced that this is the for "the greater good" mainly because I do not beleive families that have this kind of open relationship with thier kids are at the most risk for needing plan B. In any case I think more needs to be more done in the way of sex education in schools.

[homersapien 11,812]

OK, I understand your point, but my point was really that if a woman is old enough to get pregnant there's really no reason to think her body can't handle the same pill as pregnant 20 year-old.

Except that at 10 or 11 years old, she's likely anywhere between 40 and 100 lbs. or more lighter, yet she's taking a dose intended for a grown woman.

Well, not to quibble but that's pure speculation.

First, you don't know (or specify) the influence of body weight on the drugs "safety".

Second, you don't know (or specify) the statistical difference between the weights of post pubescent 10-11 yr-olds vs the general population of fertile women nor the range of weights within that population. I suspect the range you provided (as an example), is within the range of weight variation in the population of older fertile women.

In other words, there's nothing medically significant about the fact she is 10-11. But I will admit I h ave no evidence to back that up. But then, I don't think there is medical evidence to arbitrarily mandate a minimum age for the morning-after pill.

Again, aside from the fact that a girl that young may not understand that dosages for medicine should be followed closely. She might, deciding on this all by herself with no doctor or adult helping, take two or three doses at one time thinking "if one dose works well, two doses will make doubly sure!" The maturity level isn't such that this is a good decision to leave in someone's hands that young at all.

Well, I don't know if the morning-after pill is an "abortafacient" or not. It guess it depends on your definition. My understanding is that at least one of the mechanisms by which it works (preventing ovulation) would clearly be contraceptive. But I suspect there could be other mechanisms that some might consider abortion. (I'll let you do the research on that)

Regardless, if it were my 10-11 year old, I'd see the pregnancy was terminated one way or the other. Like you said, she's not old enough to make such a decision on her own. And in my calculus, the morning-after pill (or "emergency contraception" as I think it is more accurately called) is easily the least problematic option.

That's fine. And it may be the option I'd choose for her anyway. But there's no way in hell I'd want my 11 year old doing this whole thing on her own. Way too risky.

I don't blame you.

But the question is whether or not it makes sense to restrict her access if for some reason you aren't available (or even existent - some 10-11 yr-olds don't have involved parents or parents at all)

Pregnancy is pretty risky too. Especially for a 10-11 yr-old.

[homersapien 11,812]

Plan B is one pill. Hard to overdose org take too much of that, or be too stupid to figure it out. Some of them are two pills taken 12 hours apart.

The dose of these pills is high enough for an acute response to stop ovulation, but is in almost all cases not enough to causes serious reactions.

Unless the kid, conspiring with an equally ignorant friend, decides to buy multiple doses.

hopefully at 15 she can read.

A lot of people can read. They still erroneously think that if one works, two or three will work better or faster.

But we were discussing 10 or 11 year olds.

Maybe that's the "problem" (with going back and forth on such an extreme hypothetical).

I would hope that a pregnant 10 year old would trigger the intervention of law enforcement, social services, physicians, much less parents.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Plan B is one pill. Hard to overdose org take too much of that, or be too stupid to figure it out. Some of them are two pills taken 12 hours apart.

The dose of these pills is high enough for an acute response to stop ovulation, but is in almost all cases not enough to causes serious reactions.

Unless the kid, conspiring with an equally ignorant friend, decides to buy multiple doses.

hopefully at 15 she can read.

A lot of people can read. They still erroneously think that if one works, two or three will work better or faster.

But we were discussing 10 or 11 year olds.

Maybe that's the "problem" (with going back and forth on such an extreme hypothetical).

I would hope that a pregnant 10 year old would trigger the intervention of law enforcement, social services, physicians, much less parents.

Well, it's not so hypothetical when a judge is expressing problems with the FDA not removing all age restrictions on the purchase of Plan B. And while a pregnant 10-year old would trigger all sorts of stuff, no such triggers exist if she can sneak into the drugstore and buy Plan B.

[AUGradinTX 0]

How about this.. We have a nationwide database that you, as a parent, can enter your child into at the age of 12. This will allow the government to decide what is best for your minor without your consent.

If you believe your underage child should have access to anything politicians think they should have access to, you can enter them into this database and they will have that access. If you believe your underage child is your responsibility and want to raise them on your own terms, you do not enter them and they will not have that access.

This way we all win. Cool?

[alexava 6,974]

Am i so naive to think there not a lot of 10 year olds doin this annd if so do they even know such a drug exists?

[TitanTiger 20,708]

How about this.. We have a nationwide database that you, as a parent, can enter your child into at the age of 12. This will allow the government to decide what is best for your minor without your consent.

If you believe your underage child should have access to anything politicians think they should have access to, you can enter them into this database and they will have that access. If you believe your underage child is your responsibility and want to raise them on your own terms, you do not enter them and they will not have that access.

This way we all win. Cool?

That seems workable to me.

[ToomersRevenge 284]

Am i so naive to think there not a lot of 10 year olds doin this annd if so do they even know such a drug exists?

The number of 10 or 12 year olds who would need or do this is already astronomically low. They would almost certainly need a parent to even suggest it in the first place.

[homersapien 11,812]

How about this.. We have a nationwide database that you, as a parent, can enter your child into at the age of 12. This will allow the government to decide what is best for your minor without your consent.

If you believe your underage child should have access to anything politicians think they should have access to, you can enter them into this database and they will have that access. If you believe your underage child is your responsibility and want to raise them on your own terms, you do not enter them and they will not have that access.

This way we all win. Cool?

Well, considering the unlimited potential circumstances, I would say that for the sake of the general public health and for the sake of what is in the best interest of an individual woman or girl, an "opt-out" policy would be preferable.

IMO it's better to have prompt medical attention as the default.

So if you don't want your 12 year-old to be eligible (without your written permission) for a drug that is considered safe and effective in preventing her from becoming pregnant, you register her name. The same would be true for emergency blood transfusions (for example) if that didn't meet with your approval.

[AUGradinTX 0]

How about this.. We have a nationwide database that you, as a parent, can enter your child into at the age of 12. This will allow the government to decide what is best for your minor without your consent.

If you believe your underage child should have access to anything politicians think they should have access to, you can enter them into this database and they will have that access. If you believe your underage child is your responsibility and want to raise them on your own terms, you do not enter them and they will not have that access.

This way we all win. Cool?

Well, considering the unlimited potential circumstances, I would say that for the sake of the general public health and for the sake of what is in the best interest of an individual woman or girl, an "opt-out" policy would be preferable.

IMO it's better to have prompt medical attention as the default.

So if you don't want your 12 year-old to be eligible (without your written permission) for a drug that is considered safe and effective in preventing her from becoming pregnant, you register her name. The same would be true for emergency blood transfusions (for example) if that didn't meet with your approval.

In other words, you believe the "default" should be that the government trumps the parent when it comes to raising their children? Seriously?

I imaging if it were how I laid it out, the vast majority of parents would NOT enter their children into that database. It should not be up to the parent to request responsibility of their children from the government. If the government wants to offer services like this to minors, they should be given permission by the parents.

[homersapien 11,812]

How about this.. We have a nationwide database that you, as a parent, can enter your child into at the age of 12. This will allow the government to decide what is best for your minor without your consent.

If you believe your underage child should have access to anything politicians think they should have access to, you can enter them into this database and they will have that access. If you believe your underage child is your responsibility and want to raise them on your own terms, you do not enter them and they will not have that access.

This way we all win. Cool?

Well, considering the unlimited potential circumstances, I would say that for the sake of the general public health and for the sake of what is in the best interest of an individual woman or girl, an "opt-out" policy would be preferable.

IMO it's better to have prompt medical attention as the default.

So if you don't want your 12 year-old to be eligible (without your written permission) for a drug that is considered safe and effective in preventing her from becoming pregnant, you register her name. The same would be true for emergency blood transfusions (for example) if that didn't meet with your approval.

In other words, you believe the "default" should be that the government trumps the parent when it comes to raising their children? Seriously?

No, I am saying that it would be better for everyone if emergency medical services are provided to minors as a default, instead of denying those services until permission is granted. But to you point, assuming parental consultation can be accomplished within the necessary time frame there is nothing wrong with requiring parental permission.

I do agree that you have the right to control your child's life, for better or worse. It's not the government's job to tell you what you should do.

I imaging if it were how I laid it out, the vast majority of parents would NOT enter their children into that database. It should not be up to the parent to request responsibility of their children from the government. If the government wants to offer services like this to minors, they should be given permission by the parents.

I agree. The government shouldn't offer contraceptive services to a minor without the parents permission.

But the argument here is whether or not the government should restrict access for everyone based on the fact that some parents would prevent their child from receiving it.

Apparently, the judge agrees that the government has a responsibility to ensure safety and efficacy of a drug, but not to ensure your child acts in accordance with your wishes if you don't want her to take it. That's between you and your child (assuming you talk about it while there is still time).

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Am i so naive to think there not a lot of 10 year olds doin this annd if so do they even know such a drug exists?

The number of 10 or 12 year olds who would need or do this is already astronomically low. They would almost certainly need a parent to even suggest it in the first place.

Until the classmate with the older brother or sister that's told them things inappropriate to their age tells them about it.

[ToomersRevenge 284]

Am i so naive to think there not a lot of 10 year olds doin this annd if so do they even know such a drug exists?

The number of 10 or 12 year olds who would need or do this is already astronomically low. They would almost certainly need a parent to even suggest it in the first place.

Until the classmate with the older brother or sister that's told them things inappropriate to their age tells them about it.

Until that classmate's brother or sister urges them to have a frank discussion with their parents, or does it themselves, since this child is on a dangerous sexual pathway. Aren't hypotheticals fun!

[alexava 6,974]

do 10 and 11 yrolds know how you get pregnant much less how to stop it? we have gotten off course a little. I am keeping it to 15 maybe 14 less frequently 13 almost never 12, but 10 and 11 come on.

[ToomersRevenge 284]

do 10 and 11 yrolds know how you get pregnant much less how to stop it? we have gotten off course a little. I am keeping it to 15 maybe 14 less frequently 13 almost never 12, but 10 and 11 come on.

The average age of menarche in the US and 1st world is 12.5-13. So it's a small group of 10-12 year olds who are even capable of getting pregnant in the first place.

[alexava 6,974]

so we don't really need to put an age limit on this plan B pill. If they are old enough to need it and know about it they can and should be able to get it. I think its more likely they OD on something under the kitchen sink than be biologically damaged by this pill.