The decision of the Obama Administration not to fight the decision to allow the morning after pill being given to girls of any age has to be one of the biggest failures of any administration. Children cannot purchase most things until they are either 18 or 21, however, a six year old can walk into a pharmacy and get a morning after pill. Is that insanity?
The craziness of allowing children to get an abortion pill when they cannot purchase so many other items is a societal mistake of immense proportions. We, as a society, must protect our children from dangers they are too young to understand. The dangers of the morning after pill are not fully understood especially to these young children as there has not been research. Could we be making a whole generation sterile or will it cause pre-mature cancer? We have no idea.
All those who are supportive of this decision are morally bankrupt and lack courage to speak out against a societal travesty. That is our opinion. What is yours?
Conservative Tom
In Reversal, Obama to End Effort to Restrict Morning-After Pill
| The Obama administration has decided to stop trying to block over-the-counter availability of the most popular morning-after contraceptive pill for all women and girls, a move fraught with political repercussions for President Obama. |
| The reversal by the government means that anyone, no matter how young, will soon be able to walk into a drugstore and buy the pill, Plan B One-Step, without a prescription. |
| The Justice Department had been fighting to prevent that outcome, but said late Monday afternoon that it would drop its appeal of a judge’s order to make the drug more widely available. In a letter to Judge Edward R. Korman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, the administration said it would comply with his demands that the Food and Drug Administration be allowed to certify the drug for nonprescription use. |
READ MORE »
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/us/in-reversal-obama-to-end-effort-to-restrict-morning-after-pill.html?emc=na |
|
|
|
I think a girl under age 16 should consult with her parents before making a decision on abortion. Having said that, I have a question for you. Should the girl be forced to have the baby against her will? If she is only 12 or 13 years old, there are serious health risks for girls at that age to carry the baby full term. For most, their bodies are not fully developed enough...
ReplyDelete"Adolescent pregnancy is associated with higher rates of illness and death for both the mother and infant. Death from violence is the second leading cause of death during pregnancy for teens, and is higher in teens than in any other group.
Pregnant teens are at much higher risk of having serious medical complications such as:
Placenta previa
Pregnancy-induced hypertension
Premature delivery
Significant anemia
Toxemia
Infants born to teens are 2 - 6 times more likely to have low birth weight than those born to mothers age 20 or older. Prematurity plays the greatest role in low birth weight, but intrauterine growth retardation (inadequate growth of the fetus during pregnancy) is also a factor.
Teen mothers are more likely to have unhealthy habits that place the infant at greater risk for inadequate growth, infection, or chemical dependence. The younger a mother is below age 20, the greater the risk of her infant dying during the first year of life."
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001516.htm
--David
The parents are responsible for anything that happens to the child so if the child has a reaction the pill or it causes her to bleed to death, are they responsible? No 8, 10,12,14, 17 year old child has the mental capacity to make this potentially life changing decision. Additionally, the pharmacy cannot give anti-biotics, anti-histimines or an aspirin to a child and all of these medicines are less dangerous than the morning after pill.
ReplyDeleteAlso don't forget that the effects of the morning after pill have not been tested on adolescent children. This is playing with fire. Are we taking the chance for a whole generation of girls to infertility, sterility, and cancer?
I am not a doctor, but, for a 12 or 13 year old girl, their health risks of pregnancy seem worse than the risks of taking the pill. Has any girl died from the pill? If so, then we need data on percentages who die from the pill vs. percentages who die from the pregnancy. I might fact-check this. For a pregnant teen at this age, there are certainly no risk-free options.
ReplyDeleteWhat if the girl wanted the abortion, the parents refuse, and she dies from complications of the pregnancy (or commits suicide). Are the parents responsible for these things? You can't have it both ways.
--David
Fact-checking…
ReplyDeleteThere are currently 14 states where a teen does not need parental consent for an abortion, including New York and California...
http://parentingteens.about.com/od/teenpregfact/a/abortion_laws_2.htm
In several other states, she only needs one parent to consent. As provided by Supreme Court decision, she can also go to court for a "by-pass" hearing where she must establish that she is mature enough to make this decision without parental consent. The girls nearly always win these cases and get the abortion.
--David
That may be the law, but sometimes the law is an ASS! How can any adult believe that a 11, 12, 14, or even 17 year old is mature enough to walk into a drug store and purchase the morning after pill when she is NOT able to purchase other medications.
ReplyDeleteA school is NOT allowed to give that same 11,12, 14 or 17 year old an aspirin yet she can get an abortion. That is insanity!
All of this is another indication of this country in free fall. We cannot continue this path for much longer. At some point, it will all come apart.
I have no doubt that some 15-18 year old girls are mature enough to make an informed decision once given full information. As I said, for a 12 or 13 year old, the health risk is a very serious consideration.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, the girls nearly always win in by-pass hearings. For example, I read that over a 5 year period in Minnesota courts, there were 3,573 petitions by girls to have abortions without parental consent. Only 9 were denied. 5 withdrawn. 3,558 were granted. I guess the Supreme Court justices and all those judges in Minnesota must be insane, in your opinion. On the other hand, if your mind is at all open on the subject, you might want to read the Supreme Court opinion in Bellotti v. Baird (1976). Among other things, the opinion points out that the Constitution (particularly the 14th Amendment) protects everyone from government intrusions into their liberty, regardless of age. In that respect, the parental consent laws are a massive governmental intrusion in the life of the girl. For this reason, the Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth made it mandatory for states to allow girls to petition the court for abortion without parental consent, and the girls rarely lose these petitions. As in dependency cases, the "best interests" of the girl prevails, and few judges are going to rule that is it in the best interests of a teen girl to force her to have a baby against her will.
--David