ForumGarden

So, do you think lifting the age limit on this is

a good thing or not? Some reports I've heard

were talking about ELEVEN year olds getting it.

How much that would happen, I don't know. But

it is a little concerning in a way, especially that

parents wouldn't know.

Aren't they also making it an over-the-counter med?

I love how it's politicians that make these decisions.

Accountable;1423741 wrote: Aren't they also making it an over-the-counter med?

I love how it's politicians that make these decisions.


Do you mean as opposed to the religious groups that would prevent it being available at all - even to rape victims. Indeed some would oprevent any form of contraception being available if they could.

Why should it not be available on demand and what right does any politician have to deny it?

11 yrs old is a concern.

If abortion is regulated - needing parent consent for certain ages - I feel parents should be aware if a child of a certain age (11) is using the morning after pill.

This is a serious drug - with serious side affects which have not been determined - still experimental.

I don't feel a child should have access like they're taking a aspirin.

Can't drink until your 21 for many reasons

Can't abort at certain ages with conditions

So - NO - I feel this medication should be regulated.

Patsy

gmc;1423751 wrote: Do you mean as opposed to the religious groups that would prevent it being available at all - even to rape victims.No. I mean as opposed to medical experts, dumass. Religious groups don't make these decisions at all.

gmc;1423751 wrote: Why should it not be available on demand and what right does any politician have to deny it?Gee, I don't know. Do you have any other leading questions or do you already have all my positions pre-decided?

This is not an experimental drug. It has been tested & proven to have virtually no side effects.

A judge made this ruling, Accountable, not a politician, by weighing the evidence & coming to his conclusion.

If a child is having sex at 11: I have heard periods begin much earlier in young girls now then when I was young, then the average beginning time was more like 13. At least then you understood boys & life a wee bit better. I feel strange about this, but I'll agree to the judge's decision. What's going on in a young girl's home life that has her having sex at 11? Incest? Rape?

What a revolting development this is!

The idea of children needed a prescription for any kind of birth control medicine disturbs me.

Only slightly less than the idea of children needing family planning, pregnancy, and/or abortion counseling.

AnneBoleyn;1423781 wrote: This is not an experimental drug. It has been tested & proven to have virtually no side effects.

A judge made this ruling, Accountable, not a politician, by weighing the evidence & coming to his conclusion.Research on your part would probably have us agreeing a lot more often.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/06/healt ... wanted=all He [Judge Edward R. Korman of the Eastern District of New York] said that when the Health and Human Services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, countermanded a move by the Food and Drug Administration in 2011 to make the pill, which helps prevent pregnancy after sexual intercourse, universally available, “the secretary’s action was politically motivated, scientifically unjustified, and contrary to agency precedent.Had politicians not stepped in to politicize the issue then the judge wouldn't have had a decision to make.



AnneBoleyn;1423781 wrote: If a child is having sex at 11: I have heard periods begin much earlier in young girls now then when I was young, then the average beginning time was more like 13. At least then you understood boys & life a wee bit better. I feel strange about this, but I'll agree to the judge's decision. What's going on in a young girl's home life that has her having sex at 11? Incest? Rape?

What a revolting development this is!
I agree that it's revolting, but I believe that if the pill is safe (there's a relative term for this subject) then it should be left to the parent to decide if and when his/her child needs it. This despite the undeniable risk that some child abusers will use it to hide their crimes.

Anne

I know the pill has been out for some time now - safe I don't think it's safe to put your system thru the affects of this pill.

The birth control pill is very powerful with many side affects.

I have to agree with you - it's revolting reality

Patsy

Accountable;1423760 wrote: No. I mean as opposed to medical experts, dumass. Religious groups don't make these decisions at all.




Actually it's the religious groups who lobby and try to make the decisions about contraception for other people - it's the religious lobby that has prevented proper sex education in many states in the US and given half a chance will prevent the morning after pill from being available on demand. So I'm sorry I disagree with you when you claim that religious groups do not make these decisions.

Over here when the pill first came out they advocated only married women should have access to the contraceptive pill with little success as it happens. The catholic church still forbids all forms of contraception. Currently we have american inspired pro life groups (using US style tactics) not only picketing abortion clinics but targeting family planning clinics as well. You have to be religious to believe you have the right to make such decisions for a woman. Mary didn't get a choice in the matter and the church has believed no woman should have the right to choose ever since.

The morning after pill is emergency contraception so if an 11 year old needs they should perhaps have it and then why they want it can be looked in to.

Gee, I don't know. Do you have any other leading questions or do you already have all my positions pre-decided?






A leading question is one where I have phrased it so that you can only give one answer. I was asking why should it not be available on demand and also what business do politicians or the religious groups that lobby them have trying to dictate to adults when and what type of contraception they use. I don't know what your view on the matter is. I suspect it's a liberal one as in people should have the liberty to decide for themselves.

posted by larsmac

The idea of children needed a prescription for any kind of birth control medicine disturbs me.

Only slightly less than the idea of children needing family planning, pregnancy, and/or abortion counseling.


They need the information though surely? It's not as if it's some big secret they don't need to know about is it. Once they are past the age of consent it is no business of the parents (in scotland that is 16, they recently lowered it to 16 for homosexuals as well you should have seen the stushy that one caused, ironic then that the biggest homosexual child abusing group have been catholic priests ). But there have been plenty of cases recently where it's clear children do need to have somewhere to go for help and sometimes you just can't talk to your own parents especially if they are of a belief system where they don't talk about sex at all. Incest is something that goes on even if people like to pretend it doesn't.

Me: A judge made this ruling, Accountable, not a politician, by weighing the evidence & coming to his conclusion.

Accountable: Research on your part would probably have us agreeing a lot more often.

What are you squawking about dear man? I meant the judge & his decision, not the one by the Administration. Perhaps I'm stating this message in a discombobulated way. I just wanted to say discombobulated. Fun word.

Accountable: I agree that it's revolting, but I believe that if the pill is safe (there's a relative term for this subject) then it should be left to the parent to decide if and when his/her child needs it. This despite the undeniable risk that some child abusers will use it to hide their crimes.

The Pill is Safe. I combed through your article & the only objections to it's safety were: 1-"Ms. Sebelius said at the time that she was basing her decision on science because she said the manufacturer had failed to study whether the drug was safe for girls as young as 11, about 10 percent of whom are physically able to bear children." and 2-"Conservative and anti-abortion groups assailed the judge’s decision, suggesting that it may allow the pill to be given to young girls without their consent. They also say that girls who can skip the requirement to visit a doctor for a prescription may have sexually transmitted infections that go undiagnosed and untreated.

“This ruling places the health of young girls at risk, said Anna Higgins, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council."

The majority opinion: "Scientists, including those at the Food and Drug Administration, have recommended unrestricted access for years, as have the American Medical Association, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Academy of Pediatrics. They contend that the restrictions effectively keep many adolescents and younger teenagers from being able to use a safe drug in a timely way to prevent pregnancy, which carries greater safety risks than the morning-after pill."

The opinion of Ms. Anna Higgins is a waste of my very precious time!

"it should be left to the parent to decide if and when his/her child needs it." you say. I say Oh Yeah? Where was the parent before their baby girl had sex? Obviously doing something not right or most probably doing nothing at all. Great parent-child relationship going on? Think not.

Accountable;1423741 wrote: Aren't they also making it an over-the-counter med?

I love how it's politicians that make these decisions.


Certainly there is no way that it would become an over the counter med in the UK. I cannot imagine it becoming so in the US either.

Taking of this drug should be a parents decision if needed

or why have parents?

As Ann stated - many don't have parenting - they're high on the phony weed in the foil pouch SW along with alcohol - etc. etc. whatever - I just couldn't imagine not knowing what my 11 yr. old child was involved in..? Take this pill with other conditions going on - not. a 11 yr old has no position to make this decision.

Let's see - we buy healthy organic foods best for our child and the parent is not aware of medications - really.? so disturbing.

No pill is safe - not even a Tylenol

If I remember right - didn't FG have a young lady die after taking Tylenol - it created complication to a unknown condition going on.?

all meds can & will

All I hear on TV are lawsuits for contraception- Yaz product & others - IUD's

they were approved by the FDA with no side effects - really?

we're all Guinea Pigs

Patsy

AnneBoleyn;1423781 wrote: This is not an experimental drug. It has been tested & proven to have virtually no side effects.

A judge made this ruling, Accountable, not a politician, by weighing the evidence & coming to his conclusion.

If a child is having sex at 11: I have heard periods begin much earlier in young girls now then when I was young, then the average beginning time was more like 13. At least then you understood boys & life a wee bit better. I feel strange about this, but I'll agree to the judge's decision. What's going on in a young girl's home life that has her having sex at 11? Incest? Rape?

What a revolting development this is!


No side effects of a physical level possibly - side effects on an emotional / psycological level are guaranteed.

Bryn Mawr;1423832 wrote: No side effects of a physical level possibly - side effects on an emotional / psycological level are guaranteed.


But NOT as a direct result of using the drug ?

Bruv;1423834 wrote: But NOT as a direct result of using the drug ?


As a direct result of the decision to use the drug.

Bryn Mawr;1423837 wrote: As a direct result of the decision to use the drug.


Or NOT using the drug ?

Bryn Mawr;1423837 wrote: As a direct result of the decision to use the drug.You're claiming that the availability of the drug will lead to sex?

Bruv;1423839 wrote: Or NOT using the drug ?


No, not really.

The decision to have an abortion, whether surgical or a morning after job, has an impact that cannot be imagined at the time - a delayed reaction.

The decision NOT to have an abortion has implications that you can foresee and predict, the decision to "just take a pill" has repercussions that those who have not been through it cannot imagine or predict.

To make the availability "over the counter" would be a mistake - those making the decision (and, at the end of the day, it is their decision) need to appreciate the magnitude and the implications of the decision they are about to make to ensure that they (a) have stopped to think and (b) are not being coerced.

Ahso!;1423840 wrote: You're claiming that the availability of the drug will lead to sex?


Where on Earth did I suggest that?

Bryn Mawr;1423837 wrote: As a direct result of the decision to use the drug.Plan B is not an abortion pill. The person taking it doesn't even know whether or not they are pregnant, it's merely a precaution that decreases the likelihood of the egg adhering to the uterine wall. There is no real emotional or psychological negative side effects unless one is badgered and convinced otherwise. A claim of "guaranteed" negative emotional/psychological effects can be said about eating watermelons after engaging in sexual intercourse under the right circumstances.

Bryn Mawr;1423843 wrote: Where on Earth did I suggest that?It was the only way to make sense of the quoted post.

gmc;1423817 wrote: A leading question is one where I have phrased it so that you can only give one answer. I misspoke (or mis-wrote). It was a loaded question, not leading. Your question "Why should it not be available on demand and what right does any politician have to deny it?" presumed that I support that it not be made available on demand, and that a politician has a right to deny it. You do that a lot, and it's very irritating. It seems that regardless of how many conversations we have, you've got your preconceptions that will never be swayed. Anything I say that conflicts with your paradigm is simply ignored or forgotten.

AnneBoleyn;1423824 wrote: Me: A judge made this ruling, Accountable, not a politician, by weighing the evidence & coming to his conclusion.

Accountable: Research on your part would probably have us agreeing a lot more often.

What are you squawking about dear man? I meant the judge & his decision, not the one by the Administration. Perhaps I'm stating this message in a discombobulated way. I just wanted to say discombobulated. Fun word.It's one of the all-time great words. We should give students extra points for working it into an essay.

The judge had to step in because the Obama administration (Sebilius) was playing politics with the decision. The FDA had already made the pill available. If the politicians hadn't acted, then the judge wouldn't have had to fix it.

AnneBoleyn;1423824 wrote: Accountable: I agree that it's revolting, but I believe that if the pill is safe (there's a relative term for this subject) then it should be left to the parent to decide if and when his/her child needs it. This despite the undeniable risk that some child abusers will use it to hide their crimes.

The Pill is Safe. I combed through your article & the only objections to it's safety were: 1-"Ms. Sebelius said at the time that she was basing her decision on science because she said the manufacturer had failed to study whether the drug was safe for girls as young as 11, about 10 percent of whom are physically able to bear children." and 2-"Conservative and anti-abortion groups assailed the judge’s decision, suggesting that it may allow the pill to be given to young girls without their consent. They also say that girls who can skip the requirement to visit a doctor for a prescription may have sexually transmitted infections that go undiagnosed and untreated.

“This ruling places the health of young girls at risk, said Anna Higgins, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council."I didn't mean to imply that I didn't think it was safe. It's just how I write. It's my habit to state a premise with an "if" and my conclusion with a "then". Sorry.

AnneBoleyn;1423824 wrote: "it should be left to the parent to decide if and when his/her child needs it." you say. I say Oh Yeah? Where was the parent before their baby girl had sex? Obviously doing something not right or most probably doing nothing at all. Great parent-child relationship going on? Think not.I was placing the parent above the government. I really don't think we disagree here, unless you think the government should make decisions for kids in place of parental supervision.

Is there any medicine that a pharmacy or drug store will sell to a kid? I mean, it should be a simple matter even if it's never been done before; I'm just asking.

Patsy Warnick;1423831 wrote: Taking of this drug should be a parents decision if needed

or why have parents?

As Ann stated - many don't have parenting - they're high on the phony weed in the foil pouch SW along with alcohol - etc. etc. whatever - I just couldn't imagine not knowing what my 11 yr. old child was involved in..? Take this pill with other conditions going on - not. a 11 yr old has no position to make this decision.

Let's see - we buy healthy organic foods best for our child and the parent is not aware of medications - really.? so disturbing.

No pill is safe - not even a Tylenol

If I remember right - didn't FG have a young lady die after taking Tylenol - it created complication to a unknown condition going on.?

all meds can & will

All I hear on TV are lawsuits for contraception- Yaz product & others - IUD's

they were approved by the FDA with no side effects - really?

we're all Guinea Pigs

Patsy


The young woman was Cheshire Cat, she overdosed on Tylenol, no

unknown condition, she took too much after dental surgery.

From what I've heard, the MAP would seem to be far too expensive

for an 11 year old to get surely, rough estimate 30 dollars.

And yes, Acc, over the counter.

Thank You Val

My point - Tylenol which is used of swelling & pain became a deadly combination after dental surgery.

Ahso

This pill interferrs with the natural process - where do you think females ovarian cancer comes from and all other cancer in that region? birth control

Interesting how a man can profess "no problem" "no side effects". really?

Abort - you can't state this is Not a pill to abort - that is where life begins and when one feels life begins and interferrs with the very 1st change of life.

So a very innocent error could be made by a 13 yr. old going to a dentist & never mentioned she took a morning after pill 20 minutes ago.

$ 30.00 dollars MAP is nothing for this generation looking forward to the access to the pill - they'll all be on it - "just in case".

Think what you want - all pills have a side effect.

Patsy

Patsy Warnick;1423868 wrote:

Ahso

This pill interferrs with the natural process - where do you think females ovarian cancer comes from and all other cancer in that region? birth control

Patsy


I'm sorry Patsy but I really don't know where you get this stuff from.

The Morning After Pill does not cause Ovarian cancer.

Can the morning after pill cause ovarian cancer

The Pill ie birth control dramatically reduces risk of Ovarian cancer

Women on the birth control pill are protected from ovarian cancer, even decades after they stop taking it, scientists said.

British researchers found that women taking the pill for 15 years halved their chances of developing ovarian cancer, and that the risk remained low more than 30 years later, though protection weakened over time. The findings were published Friday in The Lancet.

Pill Cuts Ovarian Cancer Risk, Study Finds - CBS News

Combined Oral Contraceptive Pill (Microgynon) | Patient.co.uk

Ahso!;1423849 wrote: Plan B is not an abortion pill. The person taking it doesn't even know whether or not they are pregnant, it's merely a precaution that decreases the likelihood of the egg adhering to the uterine wall. There is no real emotional or psychological negative side effects unless one is badgered and convinced otherwise. A claim of "guaranteed" negative emotional/psychological effects can be said about eating watermelons after engaging in sexual intercourse under the right circumstances. I have to agree with you.

Although I am pro-life, your post is correct.

Bryn Mawr;1423832 wrote: No side effects of a physical level possibly - side effects on an emotional / psycological level are guaranteed.


Guaranteed? By whom? You? You don't know what you are talking about. With respect sir.

Bryn Mawr;1423842 wrote: No, not really.

The decision to have an abortion, whether surgical or a morning after job, has an impact that cannot be imagined at the time - a delayed reaction.

The decision NOT to have an abortion has implications that you can foresee and predict, the decision to "just take a pill" has repercussions that those who have not been through it cannot imagine or predict.

To make the availability "over the counter" would be a mistake - those making the decision (and, at the end of the day, it is their decision) need to appreciate the magnitude and the implications of the decision they are about to make to ensure that they (a) have stopped to think and (b) are not being coerced.


Ridiculous.

eta--Where do you get this from? What makes you an expert on how all females feel? Is this just how you wish females would feel? How you hope we feel? What makes you so sure?

Bryn Mawr;1423842 wrote: No, not really.

The decision to have an abortion, whether surgical or a morning after job, has an impact that cannot be imagined at the time - a delayed reaction.

The decision NOT to have an abortion has implications that you can foresee and predict, the decision to "just take a pill" has repercussions that those who have not been through it cannot imagine or predict.

To make the availability "over the counter" would be a mistake - those making the decision (and, at the end of the day, it is their decision) need to appreciate the magnitude and the implications of the decision they are about to make to ensure that they (a) have stopped to think and (b) are not being coerced.Who are you and why are you posting from Bryn's account?

Oscar

I clearly stated Birth Control

Now if you don't feel they are cancer causing - fine - think what you want.

I do not trust a FDA approval to convince me all is safe.

I know what I went thru with the birth control pill - I know how I felt with the side effects of the birth control pill.

"control" is stated for a reason

experience is where I get my stuff..

Patsy

"I know what I went thru with the birth control pill - I know how I felt with the side effects of the birth control pill.

"control" is stated for a reason

experience is where I get my stuff.."

But Patsy! My friend, that was not my experience.

Patsy Warnick;1423896 wrote: Oscar

I clearly stated Birth Control



Yes you did and why I added this link for you that The Birth Control Pill reduces the chance of Ovarian cancer dramatically.

Pill Cuts Ovarian Cancer Risk, Study Finds - CBS News

It does not cause Ovarian Cancer as you stated.

Kids are the property of the community, not the parents. If the parents think so, they need to move to a place that respectes their choices, until then, let the community make the decisions. Groups usually make really good decisions....especially for "dumb" people that cannot think for themselves.

Anne

you had a ok experience with the birth control pill?

OMG not me - naturally

I suppose you had a easy menopause?

OMG not me - naturally - thank God it's over - mine was medically induced due to all my surgeries

Oscar - believe what you wish - take whatever pill you wish - good luck.

Where are the studies that clearly explain where/what has caused ovarian cancer & cancers in that region?

Your studies all support & defend the up & coming pills. we're a monkey see - monkey do world - can't wait for the latest pill - the fast fix

there are and always will be complcations with the fast fix

It's a matter of time for a list of complications with this MAP - just let the Guinea pigs experiment with them for awhile - Females will be taking them like a aspirin

"just in case"

Their normal periods will change - flow - cramps etc - perhaps later when they do want a family it won't be possible.

And the fact that many females can't get pregnant is on the rise - wonder why? - Medical society comes up with another fix.

The examples can go on forever - I'm not trying to brain wash any one - to each their own.

Please don't ask me to trust the Gov't.

Patsy

I'm sorry dear Patsy. I did have an easy menopause. I had horrible periods though. I am so glad never to have my period again. That is a wonderful blessing, probably the only good thing about getting older but WOW! imagine getting older with all it's accompanied crap & still having your period too! :-1

:yh_dance

halfway;1423904 wrote: Kids are the property of the community, not the parents. If the parents think so, they need to move to a place that respectes their choices, until then, let the community make the decisions. Groups usually make really good decisions....especially for "dumb" people that cannot think for themselves.You've just described religion about as succinctly as I've ever heard. Congratulations.

Ahso!;1423908 wrote: You've just described religion about as succinctly as I've ever heard. Congratulations.


I think, but am not sure, that halfway was playing Devil's Advocate. Being sarcastic, I mean, & not stating his actual opinion. Perhaps he can clear this up.

Patsy Warnick;1423906 wrote: Anne

you had a ok experience with the birth control pill?

OMG not me - naturally

I suppose you had a easy menopause?

OMG not me - naturally - thank God it's over - mine was medically induced due to all my surgeries

Oscar - believe what you wish - take whatever pill you wish - good luck.

Where are the studies that clearly explain where/what has caused ovarian cancer & cancers in that region?

Your studies all support & defend the up & coming pills. we're a monkey see - monkey do world - can't wait for the latest pill - the fast fix

there are and always will be complcations with the fast fix

It's a matter of time for a list of complications with this MAP - just let the Guinea pigs experiment with them for awhile - Females will be taking them like a aspirin

"just in case"

Their normal periods will change - flow - cramps etc - perhaps later when they do want a family it won't be possible.

And the fact that many females can't get pregnant is on the rise - wonder why? - Medical society comes up with another fix.

The examples can go on forever - I'm not trying to brain wash any one - to each their own.

Please don't ask me to trust the Gov't.

Patsy


Are you seriously trying to suggest that taking the Pill can stop you getting pregnant In the future??????

That Is complete nonsense Patsy...

I am sorry you have had problems but your posts are wholly Inaccurate.

there's no evidence that long-term use of the birth control pill interferes with fertility. Some women experience a disruption in their menstrual cycle for several months after going off the Pill (a condition called post-pill amenorrhea). But this is usually caused by an underlying problem that's unrelated to the Pill — for example, being significantly underweight, or even being under severe stress.

In fact, taking the Pill can protect you from diseases — such as ovarian and uterine cancers — that can lead to infertility. Researchers have also found that long-term Pill use may improve the symptoms of endometriosis, a condition that can cause abnormal menstrual bleeding and result in infertility. Finally, the Pill has been shown to reduce the incidence of ectopic pregnancy — when a fertilized egg is implanted outside the uterus, typically in one of the fallopian tubes



Can long-term use of the Pill make it harder to conceive? | BabyCenter

AnneBoleyn;1423909 wrote: I think, but am not sure, that halfway was playing Devil's Advocate. Being sarcastic, I mean, & not stating his actual opinion. Perhaps he can clear this up.Who gives a sh!t what he's trying to be, what he is is an ignorant ass.

The birth control pill can raise the chances of developing cervical or breast cancer. It's a balancing act for the person wanting to take it, lowered risk of ovarian cancer but with a raised risk of cervical or breast cancer. It's the risk one takes I guess.

Long term side effects are still not really known though, they are still finding out and will be for hundreds of years yet.

I tend to agree with Patsy, side effects will keep popping up and they will keep trying to 'fix' things with yet more medication, we'll never know the true side effects for thousands of women, and the society around us, during our lifetimes.



With some morning after pills being taken up to five days after the unprotected sex, I can't help but feel that it could have an emotional effect on some women. There are women who can pin point conception and can feel the immediate change within them, so the the fact that the NHS site tells me that taking this pill is not abortion makes me hesitate and do the math. There are a proportion of women who would actually be pregnant and therefore the morning after pill would be a form of abortion.

I'm not against abortion by the way, I just know it's something I can't consider, why I don't know, it's just something that so far in my life has never been an option because I don't think I would cope well.

It's not got pleasant side effects either, no youngster should be going through it without a parents knowledge. Anyone dishing these things out to such young girls should also be offering a counselling services.

Anne

I used my tampons as fire starters..!!:yh_rotfl

Had my girlfriends over made a party out of it - glad to have that over with too.

Oscar

I'm asking ????

I had my tubes tied due to so many complications - when more complications started Dr.'s put me back on birth control - are you kidding me - with all the complications I had that was the remedy? I did not take them.

Your right Oscar - there is no evidence - no one can explain why/where these cancers arise from..?

I know neither one of my Grandmother's had any reproductive problems - of course they did not have birth control either.

heart problems - natural causes - maybe diabetes

In the Good Ole' Day's woman had 6 - 12 children & + they were very fertile

Now the infertility is at a all time high & climbing - why?

I'm just asking

Patsy

Patsy... In the good ole days we did not have the levels of STD's such as Clamidia that causes Infertility.

It Is the progression of open sexuality since the good ole days that leads to many young women being Infertile...Absolutely nothing to do with The Pill.

40 % of Infertility In couples lies with the man........ nothing to do with The Pill

Infertility - Health & Wellbeing

Oscar

I really can't make sense from your last reply.?

The 40% infertility lies with the man - he came from a woman.

My point was - every one was fertile in the Good Ole' Days - what changed?

I strongly feel this MAP is Medical Malpractice

If a child can purchase a pill of this magnitude with no questions

We all know she's having sex - no questions.?

Oscar - speaking of your STD's - no questions for this child? nothing?info? counsel?

Which brings me to - is this child a runaway? was she raped? no questions?

Is any one tracking the frequency of use of this pill for each individual? NO

Hell - we have cough medicine locked up - need to request it.

Every adult should be appauled with this decision of availabilty.

Patsy

AnneBoleyn;1423883 wrote: Guaranteed? By whom? You? You don't know what you are talking about. With respect sir.


Guilty as charged - it was a bad night

Patsy, I do think people should try to stay informed and

careful about what they ingest but just from reading your

posts, you do come off sounding a bit over the top on some

things. Maybe take a deep breath, and keep an open mind, huh?

The vast majority of women taking the birth control pill have a very

easy time of it and no problems. I myself did, for 33 years! I quit

here and there in the early 70's when doctors said you should, still,

no problems. Even when in later years, I took a pill every day to not

have periods at all. And I'm 8 years out from the last ones I took,

no problems.

As to the Tylenol part, it is something to be very careful with, and every

year too many don't pay attention. But all of those things can cause

something, yes, it's true, but again, weigh information and make choices

and it's about the best you can do. If plain ol' aspirin were to come out

today, it would be prescription only, I'll bet.

And I simply can't agree with you that $30 is nothing for kids today.

I don't see 11 year olds coming up with that very handily, unless they

got help from an older sibling or something.

ETA: Whoa there , everyone was NOT fertile in the good ol' days,

not by a long shot. And women who had 6-12 kids often had large

numbers of children die in infancy or early childhood... guess what,

survival started getting better with the advent of vaccinations!

Betty Boop;1423919 wrote: The birth control pill can raise the chances of developing cervical or breast cancer. It's a balancing act for the person wanting to take it, lowered risk of ovarian cancer but with a raised risk of cervical or breast cancer. It's the risk one takes I guess.

Long term side effects are still not really known though, they are still finding out and will be for hundreds of years yet.

I tend to agree with Patsy, side effects will keep popping up and they will keep trying to 'fix' things with yet more medication, we'll never know the true side effects for thousands of women, and the society around us, during our lifetimes.



With some morning after pills being taken up to five days after the unprotected sex, I can't help but feel that it could have an emotional effect on some women. There are women who can pin point conception and can feel the immediate change within them, so the the fact that the NHS site tells me that taking this pill is not abortion makes me hesitate and do the math. There are a proportion of women who would actually be pregnant and therefore the morning after pill would be a form of abortion.

I'm not against abortion by the way, I just know it's something I can't consider, why I don't know, it's just something that so far in my life has never been an option because I don't think I would cope well.

It's not got pleasant side effects either, no youngster should be going through it without a parents knowledge. Anyone dishing these things out to such young girls should also be offering a counselling services.


I'm glad I'm a man. :yh_sweat

Val

I don't see what I stated being over the top?

Most of my comments are in question form.?

As far as the amount $30.00 - I don't know if that's for one pill or a packet either

I figured kids have cell phones - they'll have $30.00 - they're pretty resourceful.

Interesting a thread on Gun Control can go on for months - strong will individuals debating their beliefs

yet if I indicate a strong will towards a woman's issue I'm called chief. how sweet.

I realise in the Good Ole day's many woman miscarried etc - they continued to get pregnant. Again I question why infertility is on the rise compared to a woman who had no birth control.? where are these cancers coming from?

I do not believe in vaccinations - did I receive my share as a child yes

knowing the ingredients and seeing the side effects from them - well that's another thead.

Patsy

Sigh.

Patsy, it's just more of the same with you. You want

to tar everything with the same brush, it seems.

You take me wrong when you think I called you Chief because

you indicate a "strong will" towards a woman's issue. And your

will doesn't seem all that strong when as you say "Most of

my comments are in question form?" As long as everyone

knows I'm not hiding what I originally said, I'll remove that word.

I figured you didn't believe in vaccinations, that was my point.

Let me ask you this: Are there ANY medications you DO believe in

or think are good? Insulin? Polio vaccine? What?