FDA

Obama, Plan B, Fear of Promiscuity, Sex and the Single Teen

|

Plan B
Credit: Princeton

In 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ruled on the basis of scientfic evidence that Plan B emergency contraception was safe and effective enough to be made available without a prescription to all females who might want to use it. In December, 2011 FDA Administrator Margaret Hamburg noted:

The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) completed its review of the Plan B One-Step application and laid out its scientific determination. CDER carefully considered whether younger females were able to understand how to use Plan B One-Step.  Based on the information submitted to the agency, CDER determined that the product was safe and effective in adolescent females, that adolescent females understood the product was not for routine use, and that the product would not protect them against sexually transmitted diseases. Additionally, the data supported a finding that adolescent females could use Plan B One-Step properly without the intervention of a healthcare provider.

It is our responsibility at FDA to approve drugs that are safe and effective for their intended use based on the scientific evidence.  The review process used by CDER to analyze the data applied a risk/benefit assessment consistent with its standard drug review process.  Our decision-making reflects a body of scientific findings, input from external scientific advisory committees, and data contained in the application that included studies designed specifically to address the regulatory standards for nonprescription drugs.  CDER experts, including obstetrician/gynecologists and pediatricians, reviewed the totality of the data and agreed that it met the regulatory standard for a nonprescription drug and that Plan B One-Step should be approved for all females of child-bearing potential.

In a transparently political move, the Obama administration's Health and Human Services Department issued an order overruling the FDA and maintaining the requirement that the contraceptive be available to females 16 years of age and younger only by prescription. In his first inaurgural address, President Obama promised, "We will restore science to its rightful place." Evidently its "rightful place" was determined chiefly by how it might affect his re-election chances.

Last week, a federal court judge overruled the Obama adminstration and ordered that Plan B be made available without prescription to all females who choose to use it.

Why would anyone oppose making this safe and effective means of contraception available? Some pro-life folks argue that Plan B is an abortifacient, but the vast majority of researchers believe that it works by interfering with ovulation. Why else oppose? Fear of promiscuity. From the New York Times today:

Dr. Mary Davenport, recent president of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, acknowledged that her group's opposition to Plan B is rooted in broader concerns about casual sexual activity, teenage pregnancy and single motherhood.

"Fear of pregnancy is a deterrent to sexual activity," Dr. Davenport said. "When you introduce something like this, it changes people's behaviors, and they have more risky sex. Teens will be counting on this morning-after pill to bail them out, and they'll have more casual encounters."

Bottom line: Let's make pregnant teens and their children a horrible warning to others! That'll teach them!

NEXT: MD Medical Marijuana Bill Goes to Governor

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Bottom line: Let’s make pregnant teens and their children a horrible warning to others! That’ll teach them!

    Oh but why do they hate Republicans and refuse to vote for them? It must be because of gay marriage and immigration.

  2. Some pro-life folks argue that Plan B is an abortifacient, but the vast majority of researchers believe that it works by interfering with ovulation.

    They don’t know why it’s keeping people from getting pregnant? They just stumbled on the fact that it works?

    1. AD: The link provided will take you to a summary of relevant studies and further links to those actual studies.

    2. That seems to be a poorly worded explanation of the difference of opinion: some people believe what Plan B (and the regular Pill) does can amount to abortion because it can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg; other people don’t think that would be abortion.

      1. It goes further than that, it’s not even necessarily true that it prevents implantation.

        1. I know, but if anyone thinks it even can, we go down this road.

          1. It’s one of the reasons as a atheist pro-lifer I find discussing abortion with a religious pro-lifer just as much of a waste of time as discussing it with a pro-choicer.

          2. And on top of that…

            Most fertilized eggs never implant properly anyway. So what if the pill takes the odds of failure from 70% to 99.9999%?

            This road is too littered with faith for me. Can I take the next exit?

            1. I have a religiously pro-life sister and around the time she got married I convinced her to go with the IUD. She was concerned that it prevented implantation, and I explained that most fertilized eggs didn’t implant anyway and she was satisfied.

              I know other religiously pro-life people who have rejected IUDs because of the method.

            2. Most fertilized eggs never implant properly anyway. So what if the pill takes the odds of failure from 70% to 99.9999%?

              That logic doesn’t really hold. If I come across someone who has already been shot, and 70% of people who get shot in the gut die, what does it matter if a second shot to the chest takes the odds up to 99.99999%?

              Just because bad things naturally happen, doesn’t mean making them more likely to happen doesn’t matter.

              1. Well, the point is that not implanting is a normal and natural thing to happen–more normal, in fact, than implanting. Not exactly the same as being shot.

                1. I know you’re a busy man and all, Ron, but god dammit

                  1. I know you’re a busy man and all, Ron, but god dammit…

                    He’s trying to up his average comment count.

                    1. He’s trying to up his average comment count.

                      That, or he’s actively trolling either you or me.

              2. Your comparison assumes it’s negative or unwarranted that 70% or however many eggs aren’t implanted. The point some guy makes is that impregnation isn’t a foregone conclusion to begin with.

              3. Just because bad things naturally happen, doesn’t mean making them more likely to happen doesn’t matter.

                First of all, as Nicole indicated, you’re kind of begging the question here by assuming that failure of a fertilized egg to survive the first few weeks is a bad thing.

                Second, if you advocate outlawing the pill because it significantly increases the risk of miscarriage, don’t you also have to advocate outlawing all actions and in-actions that do the same? Where do you draw the line? Do you outlaw drugs, alcohol, caffeine, cigarettes and stress for all women who might be pregnant? Do you force women to consume extra folic acid whenever they are or might be pregnant?

                1. First of all, as Nicole indicated, you’re kind of begging the question here by assuming that failure of a fertilized egg to survive the first few weeks is a bad thing.

                  I’m not begging the question. I’m assuming that it is a bad thing (which I don’t really think), to address the flawed logic of “it happens a ton anyway, why does it matter if this makes it happen more”?

                  Second, if you advocate outlawing the pill because it significantly increases the risk of miscarriage, don’t you also have to advocate outlawing all actions and in-actions that do the same? …

                  I’m not in favor banning Plan B. I’m saying that “well it happens a lot, so it doesn’t matter if it happens more” is flawed logic. You should instead argue that failure to implant isn’t a bad thing, since the people you are going to be arguing with on this topic are going to assume that it is.

                  1. I guess I could argue that it isn’t bad thing as others have already done. Or I could go back to pointing out that we don’t want to go down the road of outlawing actions that increase the odds of miscarriage, because it necessarily ends in huge violations of privacy.

              4. Who says having an egg fail to implant is a bad thing?

                1. Who says Zeb getting run over by a bus is a bad thing?

    3. The actual workings of things at the level of microbiology aren’t as well-understood as people imagine.

    4. No, it’s just the same pro-life/pro-choice bullshit being argued over. Oh, I see nicole has already covered that, but more nicely. Screw you, nicole!

      1. Oh, I see nicole has already covered that, but more nicely. Screw you, nicole!

        Just like a woman. Do things fast, but wrong. It should have done more rudely.

        1. Just like a woman. Do things fast, but wrong. It should have done more rudely.

          And with worse grammar.

          1. Also moar balls.

            1. If “It” = “Nikki” and “done” = “posted”, then I salute your consistency.

              1. That’s how I initially interpreted it, sadly.

      2. Screw you, nicole!

        But only if it doesn’t get her pregnant.

    5. Do you know what else keeps people from getting pregnant?

      1. Bros helping bros take the edge off?

        Restrictions on alcohol sales?

        Bright lights in a bar?

        Saving the front for Jesus?

  3. I’m sure Shriek will be along to tell us how Obama doesn’t really mean it.

    1. Isn’t the real problem the fundies, and not Obama? Or is he responsible for every bad thing in the universe by default?

      He made a political concession to fundies, and the court struck it down. Everybody wins.

      1. Or is [Obama] responsible for every bad thing in the universe by default?

        He’s responsible for the bad things that happen directly because of him. Like, say, the organization he is in charge of overruling the FDA for no reason.

      2. You might say that was Plan B all along.

      3. Derp. Reading is hard.

        In a transparently political move, the Obama administration’s Health and Human Services Department issued an order overruling the FDA

        1. I have no argument with the premise of this article, and I just read the same argument (that the administration was cowardly and election-focused in this case) over at Slate.

          1. In case you haven’t noticed, Obama is a bit of a socon himself… Only when the log cabin republicans looked like they were going to score a political victory over him did he put aside his homophobia and support the ending of DADT.

            1. No he’s not. He pretends to be one on TV. I doubt he believes in God, and he’s obviously supported gay marriage for a long time. But one could argue he’d never be president if he weren’t careful about these things. What he isn’t is a doctrinaire liberal so much as a pragmatist (though he’d prefer liberal policies when achievable).

          2. the administration has been and continues to be election-focused in EVERY case. It’s past the point of even being laughable.

            1. I’d hope so considering he doesn’t have the opportunity to be elected again.

            2. Also, politicians being political–break out the fainting couch.

          3. Guys, I am bookmarking this, because Tony just told us everything we need to know to never respond again:

            “Oh, wait, I just saw that Slate said, so it must be true, but when it was just reason saying it, it must be false, because I can’t differentiate argument from source”

      4. Tony| 4.9.13 @ 1:33PM |#
        “Isn’t the real problem the fundies, and not Obama?”

        Hey, shithead! RTFA!:
        “In a transparently political move, the Obama administration’s Health and Human Services Department issued an order overruling the FDA”

      5. You need to compete in Olympic-level mental gymnastics. You’d a be shoo-in for gold.

    2. Everything Obama does is for a noble purpose, even the things that are the opposite of the other things.

  4. In a transparently political move, the Obama administration’s Health and Human Services Department issued an order overruling the FDA and maintaining the requirement that the contraceptive be available to females 16 years of age and younger only by prescription.

    Is it just me or is this completely in keeping with the Total Healthcare State?

    Putting the politics of abortion aside, I’m replacing (or more accurately, removing) any words that contain abortion, birth control, etc. And I’m just re-reading this as a ‘drug’. The feds want you to have a prescription for it out of safety concerns. How is this really different from just about anything else that happens healthcare-wise in these here United States? Progressives keep clamoring for the Total Healthcare/Regulatory State, and then they get hit in the forehead by the 2×4 of the Total Healthcare/Regulatory State, and we’re supposed to feel sorry for them when they scream, “NOT FAREZ!”?

    1. but this is about sex, so it’s different.
      it’s the one area where government is powerless

      1. If only it were, but the HHS mandate says otherwise.

      2. Exactly. The government bends over backwards to protect us from easy access to all sorts of drugs, down to cold medicines, but if it’s something that screws with the reproductive track for purposes of birth control, heh, no prescription necessary!

        1. track – tract

        2. You know, certain cold medicines thin cervical mucus and increase the odds of pregnancy. I think this means taking them off the shelf is messing with our reproductive rights….wait…does it count if you’re trying to get pregnant or only if you want to keep from getting pregnant?

      3. Yes indeed. Funny how our teen can buy some safe and effective drugs over-the-counter but not others. And neither can I.

  5. While they’re making decisions based upon science, why don’t they reschedule the bud?

    1. “In a transparently political move.”….
      That’s why.

  6. Bottom line: Let’s make pregnant teens and their children a horrible warning to others! That’ll teach them!

    This goes so well with the outcry against the MTA ads shaming teen moms.

  7. “”When you introduce something like this, it changes people’s behaviors, and they have more risky sex. Teens will be counting on this morning-after pill to bail them out, and they’ll have more casual encounters.””

    I’m thinking that this woman has never actually met a teenager. Here is a clue for her, no teen in history has ever said “I won’t worry about it and just take plan B in the morning”, come to think of it neither has any adult

    1. Yes, some adults have. So I’ve heard.

  8. It may come as a shock to some, but a majority of pregnant teens got that way because they wanted a baby.

    1. As some sort of accessory like a Yorkie? Or for some other reason?

      1. was just reading about this. they want someone to love them. and babies fill that need.

        1. That’s it. Estranged from parents, not interested in school, they don’t even expect the father to stick around. They have the welfare system to rely on because it gives them food, shelter and an income to raise the baby.

    2. I don’t know about a majority but in my experience it is pretty damn common, and it definitely is a majority among those who keep the baby

    3. How do you determine that?

  9. “We will restore science to its rightful place.” Evidently its “rightful place” was determined chiefly by how it might affect his re-election chances.

    Neil deGrasse Tyson on Republicans and science.

    http://youtu.be/x7Q8UvJ1wvk

    Obama is not only full of shit but also a liar in terms of what he promised.

    Also, in other news, water is wet.

  10. So having this pill would turn all teenage girls into total whores?

    1. NOICE!

    2. Not whores. Sluts.

      Whores get paid.

    3. Aren’t the ugly ones already whores? Will it make the hot ones whores too?

    4. And if so, why the fuck didn’t they have this when I was a teenage boy?

  11. I approve of this stuff being sold in the same vending machines as the heroin. WTF is Bailey going on about “science” for?

  12. upto I saw the bank draft of $5919, I be certain that…my… neighbours mother had been actualy bringing home money part-time from there computar.. there moms best frend has done this for only about 16 months and a short time ago repayed the mortgage on there cottage and bourt a top of the range Buick. I went here,
    http://BIG76.COM

    1. How do you properly spell “mortgage” while misspelling every other damn word in the paragraph?

  13. I wonder how many children Mr. Bailey has raised and, if he has raised any, how his experiences therewith inform the opinions he expresses above.

  14. “Let’s make pregnant teens and their children a horrible warning to others! That’ll teach them!”

    It could be that it USED to teach ’em. Correlation doesn’t prove causation, but when pregnant teens were held up as horrible examples, the illegitimacy rates were much lower than they are now.

    1. If you go back far enough you’ll reach a point where teenage pregnancy was encouraged, if not demanded. I mean, how else are you going to have 5 kids and 3 miscarriages before you die at the age of 30?

      1. Those days are long past, certainly in the developed and most of the developing world.

        Pregnant teenagers aren’t the problem, the problem is pregnant teenagers perpetuating a class of hereditary welfare recipients. If we’ve actually tried anything for reducing welfare births in the last 50 or so years, it’s been singularly ineffective. The problem increases steadily despite the availability of contraceptives and abortion.

        1. I don’t think you have to go back that far to a time where most girls got married in their teens

  15. You know who else had a population control chemical that had a B at the end of its name?

    1. Funny. Wicked, macabre, but funny.

  16. Sound like a crazy ideato me dude. Wow.

    http://www.SurfinPrivacy.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.