The politics of birth control can produce unusual allies. Take Monday’s ruling in federal district court in New York, overturning the Food and Drug Administration’s ban on selling the morning after Plan B contraceptive over the counter to women younger than 18.
The judge in that case, Edward Korman, scathingly criticized several Health and Human Services and FDA officials for bowing to “pressure” from President George W. Bush’s White House and its “constituents,” and for using “political considerations, delays, and implausible justifications” to hold up nonprescription sales of the birth control drug for years.
In a 52-page ruling, Korman sounded like a speechwriter for President Barack Obama, accusing the FDA and the Bush administration of tossing science under the bus to “appease” conservative supporters of Bush in Congress and the Republican Party.
But Judge Korman is no leftover liberal from Bill Clinton’s era—he’s an appointee of Ronald Reagan, and long before that, was in the Justice Department under President Richard Nixon…
Meantime, if the Obama White House does not appeal the ruling, it will mark the fourth significant departure from the Bush administration’s positions on controversial health-care issues since Obama’s inauguration. The other three decisions allow federal funds for embryonic stem-cell research and for international aid groups that offer abortion counseling, and a move to lift the rule that would let medical personnel shun abortion-related services on the basis of their conscience.
Only controversial to nutballs who think we should live under a theocracy.
#31–RBG==thank you for the kind invitation:
1. Should Plan B drugs be sold to kiddies without parental notification or not? and why?
32 bobbo. No for the reasons already outlined by #9 Sea Lawyer. It abrogates and hijacks the overarching right for a parent to be responsible for his or her child.
RBG
#33–RBG==So the little kiddie who gets raped by her father is supposed to go to mommy for permission huh?
Control freaks. Always humane.
The notion of supporting parental control is fine for all those cases where it is not needed, but I’ve heard life is like a box of chocolates.
If she is a normal mommy, this should not be a problem. The state is usally the one doing the freaking control as it is attempting to do in this case.
Hard cases make bad law.
It makes the millions of the rest of us suffer inequitably.
RBG
#35–RBG==”If she is a normal mommy, this should not be a problem.” /// What in your fetid imagination thinks a woman married to a child molester is normal, or if normal, would be allowed by the molester to act so?
How are you or anyone else with a normal happy well adjusted family negatively impacted by kiddies from dysfunctional families having the autonomy and good sense to abort unwanted products of conception, if any there be?
My “fetid imagination” is full of ideas that mother’s care for their children. (It’s an evolutionary thing.) It is also the basis for giving parents first responsibility for children instead of the state.
Now imagine a world where laws could be enacted to help fix every single aberrant and unhappy case but also had to apply to everyone else. Nice. And impractical.
Child molesters can be your own good ol’ boy neighbour or co-worker. Presumably that makes you an unfit person as well.
Ah, now I see: “unwanted products.” Like shit & piss, and people who might have disabilities like homosexuality, right?
RBG
#37–RBG–well congrats of a sort. You stayed on subject for two posts. Not bad.
Try again. Same questions. Pretend that not everyone lives the life/has the values or circumstances that you imagine you do.
Listen, if this keeps the Palin kid from another kid – I’m for it!
Now if we can just get Sarah to take it.
38. bobbo. Okay, let’s try that. Parents rule. How did I do?
As it happens, analogies by definition don’t have to be literally on topic, they merely have to illustrate a point that is on topic. In my #28 analogy above I illustrate the hypocrisy of those who feel they have the right to arbitrarily pick and choose when parents have jurisdiction over raising their own children. Glad to help out.
RBG
Bobbo, my point is that I think it is likely that this would become the primary contraception for many people, especially if provided over the counter without seeing a doctor, hence Plan A.
Again, Congress hasn’t passed a law saying Plan B should be allowed, they authorized a general process for drugs and medical devices. I have doubts as to the constitutionality of this delegation of authority, but we’ll ignore that.
The FDA’s review panel concluded that Plan B would not become ‘plan A’, and this was one of the points which caused the director to override the decision. It may have been that he would have overridden in any case for political reasons, but my point is that a review based on science alone would not reach such an opinion, which seems very illogical.
Without this scientific conclusion, Plan B could not have been accepted for OTC under the FDA review process. It could be that this science is based on corporate research which has a huge incentive to reach one conclusion, but that is also a ‘politcial’ decision.
#40–RBG==you fail by clearly stating how silly your rule is. No one, not even YOU when not caught in a blog would say Parents should be able to do whatever they want to/with their kids. Absent your clear REASONING for your position, it is as arbitrary to have a rule one way or the other.
My rule is based on recognizing that kiddies in a good relationship with their parents will involve them and that kiddies that feel the need NOT to involve them probably have good reason. Your posturing with no reason at all is sadly good enough for too many ill informed people who turn out to be bigots on so many other human dignity/freedom questions.
>That is why they do not cover tobacco, alcohol, or marijuana.
Strangely enough, this is the one drug mentioned in the GAO report, Nicorette and similar products, covered by the FDA.
#45, Lyin’ Mike,
Strangely enough, this is the one drug mentioned in the GAO report, Nicorette and similar products, covered by the FDA.
Nicotine is a drug that is covered by the FDA. Tobacco is a product exempt from the FDA and covered under (I believe) 12 different Acts.
#51–Mickey==when you are digging in a pile of horseshit, STOP!!
“Most drugs on the market are unsafe if misused.” /// NO. Anything, drugs or anything, on the market or not, are unsafe if misused.
Too stupid to respond to except as already done.
Bobbo, you have already said you are unclear on the FDA process. I skimmed thru the GAO report and am trying to explain it to you. The safety of a drug gets evaluated in context of how it is used.
So your statement of
>If the drug is NOT SAFE, it is not put on the market even if people want it.
makes no sense, given that anything can be unsafe. A drug gets put on the market based on certain evaluation.
In this case one of the evaluations was whether Plan B would be a primary form of birth control, or used as intended.
If your child doesn’t confide in you and trust you to help them with problems by the time they are 16, you already blew your parenting opportunity. The argument that this abrogates parental authority is disingenuous. Also, if you don’t know enough about your childs activities after 16 years to at least be aware that they have a problem, you don’t deserve to be part of the solution.
Stooopid Lyin’ Mike,
one of the evaluations was whether Plan B would be a primary form of birth control, or used as intended.
“Plan B” is intended as a back up plan in case the primary birth control doesn’t work (ie, hole in condom) or there is no primary birth control (as in unexpected sex or rape). The reason is the efficacy is not as good as most other forms of birth control. It is, however, better than nothing and for those who have very sporadic sexual encounters, this might end up being a more suitable alternative than no protection at all.
I’m sure the FDA will not suggest ibuprofen will cure a broken leg, but it can be better than nothing when nothing else is available. The anti-inflammatory and pain relieving properties of ibuprofen can help the patient. But no one in their right mind is going to suggest this is all a person SHOULD do.
#54, Alix,
You make a good point but I don’t totally agree. Even a 16 y/o has secrets they won’t tell their best friend. That doesn’t mean they don’t trust their parents or friends, but the embarrassment is just too much.
For example, while normal people, and by that I mean you and I, would sure the heck want to know if an extended family member forced our daughters to have sex, it is quite possible the daughter wouldn’t want to tell us.
42 bobbo No one, not even YOU when not caught in a blog would say Parents should be able to do whatever they want to/with their kids.
You’re right. Except for 99.9999% of parents. Keep your hands off them and their innate rights and responsibilities and I’ll sign on. Figure some other way to take care of the problematic cases where the parents are some kind of monsters.
RBG
#55, you write so much yet understand so little
Your own statement has you contradicting the scientists. Have you changed your mind about that? I think you are right, and the scientists are wrong.
Will Plan B be used as a primary form of birth control?
#58, Stooopid Lyin’ Mike,
Will Plan B be used as a primary form of birth control?
As I have already written, YES. Is that the smartest thing to do? NO. Are there reasons a woman might prefer to use “Plan B” as her primary source of protection? YES.
People take and abuse* OTCs every day. Occasionally they cause injury. Usually not. But used as intended, all OTCs have a large safety factor and can tolerate most abuse.
*= using other than as directed or intended on the package.
#57–RBG==no, YOU figure out some other way. The law IS the solution to the problem. Throwing it out without even a suggestion of something else is irresponsible.
We’ve had 8 years of that. Time for change!!