There’s no good way to feel about any of this, so let’s get into it.
Earlier this week the Health and Human Services Department overruled a decision by the Food and Drug Administration to make the morning after pill available to teenagers without a prescription. This comes after the Obama Administration was examining the possibility of selling the pill to teenagers, which the FDA initially approved.
The makers of Plan B wanted to put the pill on pharmacy shelves instead of behind the pharmacist’s counter, which as you can imagine would make it more daunting for teens to seek the medication out. Previously, however, a federal court ordered the Food and Drug Administration to reconsider its decision preventing minors from purchasing the morning after pill without a prescription.
On Wednesday the FDA Administrator, Margaret Hamburg said she approved of allowing the pill to be marketed on store shelves, but Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (pictured) rejected the decision.
“I agree…there is adequate and reasonable, well-supported, and science-based evidence that Plan B One-Step is safe and effective and should be approved for nonprescription use for all females of child-bearing potential,” Hamburg said. “However, this morning I received a memorandum from the Secretary of Health and Human Services invoking her authority under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to execute its provisions and stating that she does not agree with the Agency’s decision to allow the marketing of Plan B One-Step nonprescription for all females of child-bearing potential.”
Urgh. As a someone who believes that women should be able to make decisions that pertain to the health and safety of their own bodies, which includes the emotional, financial, and physical responsibilities of caring for a child, or not, it pains me to read that a woman would not have that choice.
This is what Secretary Sebelius had to say about her decision:
“The average age of the onset of menstruation for girls in the United States is 12.4 years. However, about ten percent of girls are physically capable of bearing children by 11.1 years of age. It is common knowledge that there are significant cognitive and behavioral differences between older adolescent girls and the youngest girls of reproductive age. If the application were approved, the product would be available, without prescription, for all girls of reproductive age.”
“Because I do not believe enough data were presented to support the application to make Plan B One-Step available over the counter for all girls of reproductive age, I have directed FDA to issue a complete response letter denying the supplemental new drug application (SNDA) by Teva Women’s Health, Inc,” Sebelius continued.
What she’s not saying here is that she feared girls below the age of 12.4 years would use the drug indiscriminately, as a form of birth control, and without the maturity or behavioral capacity to understand their actions and full ramifications. Yeah, there’s some stuff in there about safety, but the FDA ruled the drug safe, so it seems more a social issue than a health one.
Yet, there are many branches to this argument. Would having Plan B available to any and all women or girls suggest that we as a nation condone sexual activity involving pre-teens? Or is it a good all around step in reducing the amount of unwanted pregnancies?
Tony Perkins, the head of the Family research Council, and a pro-life advocate, worried that underage girls would become victims of sexual abuse since their abusers could use the drug to cover up their crimes. Uh-huh. Of the arguments I’ve read, this sounds the most like a red herring in covering up a pro-life agenda, since many pro-lifers believe abortions should be illegal even in the case of rape or incest. Perkins goes on to say that potentially having the availability of Plan B could increase the amount of STDs since women would purchase the medication without a full medical screening.
So basically Plan B will create more sexual abuse, more STDs, it will bring on a biblical plague, cats and dogs will live together, and men will marry each other! Seriously, yikes. It’s scary digging too deep into some of this rhetoric, and I’m not even going there with all those who think Plan B is just an out and out abortion pill, even though IT IS NOT THE ABORTION PILL! Sheesh.
For president Obama’s part, the AP reports that he is now defending his Administration’s decision to stop plans to allow Plan B’s move to drugstore shelves. He says as a father of two daughters, the government should “apply some common sense” to rules when it comes to over-the-counter medication, and that he understands Sebelius’ concerns citing that, “most parents would probably feel the same way.”
The New Yorker reports, Representative Henry Waxman, long the most sophisticated advocate of public health in Congress, was dumbfounded. “I think it’s very unfortunate the Secretary made the decision that she did,” he said. “The F.D.A. is a scientific agency, and they gave her their recommendation based on the science, and I think she should have followed it.”
Again, urgh. Could the president and Ms. Sebelius be making these decisions based on emotion — and politics — and not what is scientific fact, which is that females, no matter the age, could safely prevent the birth of an unwanted child?
Is it less about speaking as a parent, or as a referendum on teen sex, and more about speaking as a citizen of the world, and a leader who has to govern with hopes of reaching the greatest good with regard to reducing the amount of unwanted pregnancies in our nation?
These are tough questions, but perhaps, this is what is supposed to separate our leaders from those who call themselves merely advocates.
Yesterday, the president of Planned Parenthood, Cecile Richards requested a meeting with Sebelius about the decision, saying in her letter, “HHS’ decision to overrule the FDA hurts all women by imposing arbitrary restrictions on a product that is only effective when taken in a timely manner. All women deserve timely access to emergency contraception.”
I’m thinking it probably would have been great for this meeting to happen prior to the decision so perhaps Sebelius could get some real-world information before making the decision.
No matter what, though, it remains a complex issue.
