Finally: Science Allowed to be Science Again

[Gunny]

Whether or not someone takes a safe OTC drug should be a personal choice.... not one interfered with by government because of the religious objections of a group of people:

Kudos.... this issue and what it represents, is yet another major reason the repubs lost the support of the middle.

FDA to Approve Morning After Pill Following Fed. Court Decision
By Carol Forsloff.


Obama is doing what he said he would do to put science back in business. In response to a Federal court decision, his administration is allowing 17-year-olds to obtain the morning after pill without a prescription or parental consent.
George Bush had refused to approve the use of morning after pills for young women, so this new decision has consequences politically for the Obama administration and at the same time fulfilling a promise to overturn the previous administration’s policies on matters of birth control. While some people will react this encourages promiscuity, others believe that this will in effect reduce the risk of teenage pregnancies. That’s particularly true if the teenager has been a victim of date rape, incest or one of these issues of consequence to young women. Still it is controversial.

People are confused about the effect of the morning after pill, however. Some believe it interrupts conception that has already started. Others say it simply prevents it from occurring in the first place, thereby preventing life from initiation and that it is not an abortion pill. These things are being discussed in forums already all over the Internet.

The Obama administration is following through with the promise to bring science back into the decisions about matters involving sex and family planning and follows a recent decision in Federal courts of the case Tummino v. Torti. This is a summary of its findings according to an online journal serving the legal community:


“ Judge Edward Korman held that the FDA had engaged in arbitrary and capricious decisionmaking when it refused to permit a form of emergency contraception, called "Plan B," to be made available over the counter (OTC) to women under 18. The sole question before the FDA involved whether Plan B, available by prescription, would also be made available over the counter. The evidence before Judge Korman has made quite clear that the White House itself interfered with the ordinary science-based processes of the FDA in order to restrict the availability of Plan B for irrational reasons.”


The conclusion made by the courts, the journal states, reveals how religion displaced science for the public good despite the fact that science had established opinion that opposed the Bush Administration. Instead of terminating an early pregnancy, the morning after pill, according to scientific opinion examined by the courts, prevents fertilization from occurring before conception could occur.

This new development will likely be part of the discussion of the changes made since President Obama took office this year and is certain to be part of religious discourse in some circles.

FDA to Approve Morning After Pill Following Fed. Court Decision - Digital Journal: Your News Network

This thread already exists and this isn't at a case of science allowed to be science again. Science was never not allowed to be science. Except in the minds of people who believe a bunch of hogwash.

 

[Care4all]

it is legal for all children 17 years old and older, to consent to sex...some states have it at 16, maybe even some have 15, but all states have the legal age of at least 17, for consenting to sex....the parent may differ with this, the parent may wish their child to not have sex outside of marriage....but this does not legally stop the 17 year old if they feel like doing it.

Dave

In schools it is different than outside of schools and each school makes their own rules.

A teen or child can buy a bottle of advil at the pharmacy....your neighbor can give your child an aspirin

No one can buy the products that can make crystal meth at the drug store without scrutiny today, not even adults.

but anything else in a drug store, that is not behind the counter, such as prescription drugs and cigarettes, can be purchased by any child....i could give my 10 year old a list of things to run in and get for me and he can run in and buy them.

I am with you on parental consent or parental notification on things like an abortion, BUT ONLY if your child is below the age of sexual consent in your state....and would make the personal rule with my own child to come forward, and speak to me, even if 17!!!!!

But I do not think there is any legal grounds for not permitting a 17 year old, who is legal, regarding their own decision to have sex or not, from having this over the counter drug available to them as it is available to all the other "legal to have sex" adult individuals out there.

You have the responsibility as a parent, to rear your own children in the manner in which you believe to be "right" and talk to them about your concerns with taking "Plan B" in the event of a possible pregnancy taking place....and teach them to not take it, and come to you if they are considering such.

Care

Sexual consent is not medical consent... and the decisions for the care of your child does indeed fall on you as the parent... the child is still in your charge... and I am sorry, but I still consider a minor of 17 as a child...

And yes.. before someone else or you asks.. I am against the underage consent legality of a child having sex...

And as stated.. just because a child/minor CAN (thru various means) get a hold of cigs or beers or whatever, does not mean that we should make it legal for them to do so... we know kids are going to do many things and make mistakes.. but this does not take the responsibility away from parents for the decision making for the child under your care

Know that I can only sympathize or empathise with you, because matt and i were never able to have children of our own...

Yes, parents are responsible for their child until they are 18....but in this process of rearing responsibility, there comes a point as your children approach their ''legal'' age of 18, a weaning process has to take place, to prepare your child for adulthood.

Your 16 year old would be alot farther along in this process than your 12 year old, but your 12 year old would be alot farther along with their weaning than your 7 year old.

As example your 16 year old may be able to get their ''student'' drivers permit...while your 12 year old... not.

Your 12 year old may be old enough to leave at home when you go to the movies or babysit for someone, but your 7 year old would not.

This is ALL a process that you go through as parents, preparing your child for all the responsibilities they will have, as an 18 year old adult....little by little, one by one getting them ready.

By the time your child is 17, it is nearly the same as them being 18....you either taught them ''right'' and they actually listened and followed your guidance or they didn't...at this point, it is nearly out of your hands imo...even if you did teach them ''right'' because at this time, they are responsible for themselves except for food and shelter you must provide till 18.

personally, i don't think many teens or girls even in to their early 20's really understand the consequences of ''free sex'', but i suppose this is all part of growing up....

I know so much more today than i did yesterday, regarding many aspects of life...we learn from mistakes, and with time....with age.

As a parent you are NOT held legally responsible for your 17 year old's crime, even though you are ''responsible'' for them...some are even charged as adults with their crimes, even though minors.

care

 

[Truthmatters]

At younger than that they can be tried as an adult.

 

[Tech_Esq]

What I really believe is that it is our job as parents to know when our kids are sexually active or ready to be sexually active... and to assist them in making smart choices.

Just say no doesn't work for either drugs... or sex. And as a society, we have to be realistic about that. No one is going to have unprotected sex BECAUSE of the availablility of this pill. Kids need to be taught that abstinence is the best option. They have to also be taught responsibility for birth control... but sometimes things happen. And I don't want anyone, even someone we'd consider a child, having a child because they were afraid to go to an adult.

I want it to be like that scene in Summer of 42 where the kid gets gum, mouthwash, cookies, and throws in the condoms (or RU-486 or whatever ... ) under the pile of stuff.

I loved that movie by the way....lol

OK, true story. This is what we did (we have a 20 year old daughter). We found out, through various means (I would encourage all parents to find out their children's myspace and or facebook accounts and monitor what they publish), that our daughter had been sexually active.

What followed was the part where she admitted to us (under cross examination by me) that she had been drinking, smoking pot and having intercourse. One event, not a pattern of behavior. We, of course, already knew this because we saw it on her myspace page. So, we asked if protection was used. Of course it wasn't. First order of business, we took her to the doctor and had her tested for STDs and birth control pills prescribed. We there after made condoms available in a way that it was not necessary for her to ask for them and encouraged her to get a little friend (Did you know they are available at Spencer's now?) Additionally, she was treated to repeated conversations about responsibility and reality of unwanted pregnancy and bad behavior. This was when she was 16.

My feeling on it is that you have to start young providing a framework for your child's thinking and morals. They will apply this unevenly. You need to provide support and corrective actions consistently during their teen years, but you have already built the person. They will make mistakes and it is your job as a parent to successfully deliver that child to adulthood. After that, they are their own problem. You owe it to them and yourself to deliver the best prepared person you can to adulthood.

The epilogue is after a two year foray in "making it on her own," she is moving back in at the end of the week and is now thanking us for teaching her so many valuable lessons that she used while she was on her own. And, she managed to not get pregnant along the way. So, we're hoping our 14 year old boy is a little less hard-headed than his sister.

 

[DiamondDave]

Its awesome and hilarious how repukes are always railing against unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortion, but they fight tooth and nail - with every fiber of their being - to keep easy access to contraceptives out of the hands of women.

Again.. the term woman insinuates an adult.. a minor is not an adult.. but nice try

I do condone birth control for adults... and I respect parents that do choose to have their kids on birth control, if that is a decision they make with their child... and they give the permission to the medical professional to prescribe that birth control.. it may not be the approach I am taking, but I respect their different style of responsibility

 

[Tech_Esq]

it is legal for all children 17 years old and older, to consent to sex...some states have it at 16, maybe even some have 15, but all states have the legal age of at least 17, for consenting to sex....the parent may differ with this, the parent may wish their child to not have sex outside of marriage....but this does not legally stop the 17 year old if they feel like doing it.

Dave

In schools it is different than outside of schools and each school makes their own rules.

A teen or child can buy a bottle of advil at the pharmacy....your neighbor can give your child an aspirin

No one can buy the products that can make crystal meth at the drug store without scrutiny today, not even adults.

but anything else in a drug store, that is not behind the counter, such as prescription drugs and cigarettes, can be purchased by any child....i could give my 10 year old a list of things to run in and get for me and he can run in and buy them.

I am with you on parental consent or parental notification on things like an abortion, BUT ONLY if your child is below the age of sexual consent in your state....and would make the personal rule with my own child to come forward, and speak to me, even if 17!!!!!

But I do not think there is any legal grounds for not permitting a 17 year old, who is legal, regarding their own decision to have sex or not, from having this over the counter drug available to them as it is available to all the other "legal to have sex" adult individuals out there.

You have the responsibility as a parent, to rear your own children in the manner in which you believe to be "right" and talk to them about your concerns with taking "Plan B" in the event of a possible pregnancy taking place....and teach them to not take it, and come to you if they are considering such.

Care

Sexual consent is not medical consent... and the decisions for the care of your child does indeed fall on you as the parent... the child is still in your charge... and I am sorry, but I still consider a minor of 17 as a child...

And yes.. before someone else or you asks.. I am against the underage consent legality of a child having sex...

And as stated.. just because a child/minor CAN (thru various means) get a hold of cigs or beers or whatever, does not mean that we should make it legal for them to do so... we know kids are going to do many things and make mistakes.. but this does not take the responsibility away from parents for the decision making for the child under your care

Know that I can only sympathize or empathise with you, because matt and i were never able to have children of our own...

Yes, parents are responsible for their child until they are 18....but in this process of rearing responsibility, there comes a point as your children approach their ''legal'' age of 18, a weaning process has to take place, to prepare your child for adulthood.

Your 16 year old would be alot farther along in this process than your 12 year old, but your 12 year old would be alot farther along with their weaning than your 7 year old.

As example your 16 year old may be able to get their ''student'' drivers permit...while your 12 year old... not.

Your 12 year old may be old enough to leave at home when you go to the movies or babysit for someone, but your 7 year old would not.

This is ALL a process that you go through as parents, preparing your child for all the responsibilities they will have, as an 18 year old adult....little by little, one by one getting them ready.

By the time your child is 17, it is nearly the same as them being 18....you either taught them ''right'' and they actually listened and followed your guidance or they didn't...at this point, it is nearly out of your hands imo...even if you did teach them ''right'' because at this time, they are responsible for themselves except for food and shelter you must provide till 18.

personally, i don't think many teens or girls even in to their early 20's really understand the consequences of ''free sex'', but i suppose this is all part of growing up....

I know so much more today than i did yesterday, regarding many aspects of life...we learn from mistakes, and with time....with age.

As a parent you are NOT held legally responsible for your 17 year old's crime, even though you are ''responsible'' for them...some are even charged as adults with their crimes, even though minors.

care

That is a correct rendition of the theory of child rearing in the teen years.

The reality is never as straight forward as that. For one, the kids get a vote. Just like Rumsfeld used to say, "the enemy gets a vote." Not that the kids are the enemy, but sometimes they just won't act according to your plan.

We had a plan for how to handle our daughter in her teen years, but it depended upon rational actions on her part. She failed to meet those standards and we failed to make her understand how meeting those standards would help her and inspire her to do better. You also get the wild cards of friends and school to deal with. But, in theory, you are absolutely right.

 

[jillian]

I loved that movie by the way....lol

OK, true story. This is what we did (we have a 20 year old daughter). We found out, through various means (I would encourage all parents to find out their children's myspace and or facebook accounts and monitor what they publish), that our daughter had been sexually active.

What followed was the part where she admitted to us (under cross examination by me) that she had been drinking, smoking pot and having intercourse. One event, not a pattern of behavior. We, of course, already knew this because we saw it on her myspace page. So, we asked if protection was used. Of course it wasn't. First order of business, we took her to the doctor and had her tested for STDs and birth control pills prescribed. We there after made condoms available in a way that it was not necessary for her to ask for them and encouraged her to get a little friend (Did you know they are available at Spencer's now?) Additionally, she was treated to repeated conversations about responsibility and reality of unwanted pregnancy and bad behavior. This was when she was 16.

My feeling on it is that you have to start young providing a framework for your child's thinking and morals. They will apply this unevenly. You need to provide support and corrective actions consistently during their teen years, but you have already built the person. They will make mistakes and it is your job as a parent to successfully deliver that child to adulthood. After that, they are their own problem. You owe it to them and yourself to deliver the best prepared person you can to adulthood.

The epilogue is after a two year foray in "making it on her own," she is moving back in at the end of the week and is now thanking us for teaching her so many valuable lessons that she used while she was on her own. And, she managed to not get pregnant along the way. So, we're hoping our 14 year old boy is a little less hard-headed than his sister.

It's a great flick.

What you did as a parent was EXACTLY right, IMO. You taught her morality, but didn't close your eyes to reality. I KNOW the things I did when I was younger. And I would have been considered one of the "good" kids. In fact, I've been described by former classmates as a "cool nerd". lol.. (I think that just means I didn't look like a geek).

But I digress....

Ultimately, you're correct, we have to keep eyes open and use the means at our disposal to know what's going on. I agree about the facebook pages. And congratulations on a job well done.

 

[DiamondDave]

it is legal for all children 17 years old and older, to consent to sex...some states have it at 16, maybe even some have 15, but all states have the legal age of at least 17, for consenting to sex....the parent may differ with this, the parent may wish their child to not have sex outside of marriage....but this does not legally stop the 17 year old if they feel like doing it.

Dave

In schools it is different than outside of schools and each school makes their own rules.

A teen or child can buy a bottle of advil at the pharmacy....your neighbor can give your child an aspirin

No one can buy the products that can make crystal meth at the drug store without scrutiny today, not even adults.

but anything else in a drug store, that is not behind the counter, such as prescription drugs and cigarettes, can be purchased by any child....i could give my 10 year old a list of things to run in and get for me and he can run in and buy them.

I am with you on parental consent or parental notification on things like an abortion, BUT ONLY if your child is below the age of sexual consent in your state....and would make the personal rule with my own child to come forward, and speak to me, even if 17!!!!!

But I do not think there is any legal grounds for not permitting a 17 year old, who is legal, regarding their own decision to have sex or not, from having this over the counter drug available to them as it is available to all the other "legal to have sex" adult individuals out there.

You have the responsibility as a parent, to rear your own children in the manner in which you believe to be "right" and talk to them about your concerns with taking "Plan B" in the event of a possible pregnancy taking place....and teach them to not take it, and come to you if they are considering such.

Care

Sexual consent is not medical consent... and the decisions for the care of your child does indeed fall on you as the parent... the child is still in your charge... and I am sorry, but I still consider a minor of 17 as a child...

And yes.. before someone else or you asks.. I am against the underage consent legality of a child having sex...

And as stated.. just because a child/minor CAN (thru various means) get a hold of cigs or beers or whatever, does not mean that we should make it legal for them to do so... we know kids are going to do many things and make mistakes.. but this does not take the responsibility away from parents for the decision making for the child under your care

Know that I can only sympathize or empathise with you, because matt and i were never able to have children of our own...

Yes, parents are responsible for their child until they are 18....but in this process of rearing responsibility, there comes a point as your children approach their ''legal'' age of 18, a weaning process has to take place, to prepare your child for adulthood.

Your 16 year old would be alot farther along in this process than your 12 year old, but your 12 year old would be alot farther along with their weaning than your 7 year old.

As example your 16 year old may be able to get their ''student'' drivers permit...while your 12 year old... not.

Your 12 year old may be old enough to leave at home when you go to the movies or babysit for someone, but your 7 year old would not.

This is ALL a process that you go through as parents, preparing your child for all the responsibilities they will have, as an 18 year old adult....little by little, one by one getting them ready.

By the time your child is 17, it is nearly the same as them being 18....you either taught them ''right'' and they actually listened and followed your guidance or they didn't...at this point, it is nearly out of your hands imo...even if you did teach them ''right'' because at this time, they are responsible for themselves except for food and shelter you must provide till 18.

personally, i don't think many teens or girls even in to their early 20's really understand the consequences of ''free sex'', but i suppose this is all part of growing up....

I know so much more today than i did yesterday, regarding many aspects of life...we learn from mistakes, and with time....with age.

As a parent you are NOT held legally responsible for your 17 year old's crime, even though you are ''responsible'' for them...some are even charged as adults with their crimes, even though minors.

care

You don't just wean... but you do work with your kids in showing the steps they take towards becoming a responsible adult... in my family the EARN the privilege of additional responsibilities and decision making, but it does not mean that I am not involved in those decisions.. and I will be involved and still RESPONSIBLE until they reach adulthood.. and after that I will be around with all the advice and support I can give

Just like in military training.. you come along and you gain more, but you ain't a soldier and you don't get the responsibility of being a soldier until you finish your training and graduate to that level

And don't confuse a crime with the care and well being of a child... quite a difference there.. but much like a crime, accountability is expected when you do something or something does happen... I cannot always be responsible for my kids' actions but I am always responsible for their well being and care until I relinquish that responsibility on to their shoulders when they do reach adulthood.. and this is an issue about their care and well being, not about the action of sex itself

 

[Truthmatters]

Some 17 year olds have been raped by people in thier own families and are affraid to report it or cant.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I loved that movie by the way....lol

OK, true story. This is what we did (we have a 20 year old daughter). We found out, through various means (I would encourage all parents to find out their children's myspace and or facebook accounts and monitor what they publish), that our daughter had been sexually active.

What followed was the part where she admitted to us (under cross examination by me) that she had been drinking, smoking pot and having intercourse. One event, not a pattern of behavior. We, of course, already knew this because we saw it on her myspace page. So, we asked if protection was used. Of course it wasn't. First order of business, we took her to the doctor and had her tested for STDs and birth control pills prescribed. We there after made condoms available in a way that it was not necessary for her to ask for them and encouraged her to get a little friend (Did you know they are available at Spencer's now?) Additionally, she was treated to repeated conversations about responsibility and reality of unwanted pregnancy and bad behavior. This was when she was 16.

My feeling on it is that you have to start young providing a framework for your child's thinking and morals. They will apply this unevenly. You need to provide support and corrective actions consistently during their teen years, but you have already built the person. They will make mistakes and it is your job as a parent to successfully deliver that child to adulthood. After that, they are their own problem. You owe it to them and yourself to deliver the best prepared person you can to adulthood.

The epilogue is after a two year foray in "making it on her own," she is moving back in at the end of the week and is now thanking us for teaching her so many valuable lessons that she used while she was on her own. And, she managed to not get pregnant along the way. So, we're hoping our 14 year old boy is a little less hard-headed than his sister.

It's a great flick.

What you did as a parent was EXACTLY right, IMO. You taught her morality, but didn't close your eyes to reality. I KNOW the things I did when I was younger. And I would have been considered one of the "good" kids. In fact, I've been described by former classmates as a "cool nerd". lol.. (I think that just means I didn't look like a geek).

But I digress....

Ultimately, you're correct, we have to keep eyes open and use the means at our disposal to know what's going on. I agree about the facebook pages. And congratulations on a job well done.

Thanks. Like most parents, we do the best we can. Sometimes it turns out like we hope, sometimes you scramble a bit and make the best out of the facts you have. That's why I didn't kill Palin for her family situation. You can want things to be a certain way, you can even put in the work, but that doesn't mean you are going to get the result you want.

It just doesn't work like that. The harder challenge as a parent is to stay in the game after you don't get what you want.

I feel ya on the 'cool nerd' thing both my wife and I were that in college. I think you have the reasons about right.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Some 17 year olds have been raped by people in thier own families and are affraid to report it or cant.

Should we always create public policy based on the lowest common denominator or possibility or just sometimes?

Should girls be allowed to purchase morning after pills over the counter if they are old enough to menstruate?

 

[jillian]

Thanks. Like most parents, we do the best we can. Sometimes it turns out like we hope, sometimes you scramble a bit and make the best out of the facts you have. That's why I didn't kill Palin for her family situation. You can want things to be a certain way, you can even put in the work, but that doesn't mean you are going to get the result you want.

It just doesn't work like that. The harder challenge as a parent is to stay in the game after you don't get what you want.

I feel ya on the 'cool nerd' thing both my wife and I were that in college. I think you have the reasons about right.

My only issue with Palin was that she would support policies that affected OTHER people's ability to make choices. I feel bad for her kid, though. The guy's a loser... and that has nothing to do with politics.

Ultimately, I want every tool available. that includes sex education, readily available birth control, discussions about safe sex... and the ability to obtain RU-486 or a safe and legal abortion if necessary.

My son is 11 1/2. I don't know when his hormones are going to kick in. But when they do, I want him fully informed and fully able to make decisions. And if he screws up with regard to a decision, I hope it's something that we can deal with as a family to get him back on track.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Thanks. Like most parents, we do the best we can. Sometimes it turns out like we hope, sometimes you scramble a bit and make the best out of the facts you have. That's why I didn't kill Palin for her family situation. You can want things to be a certain way, you can even put in the work, but that doesn't mean you are going to get the result you want.

It just doesn't work like that. The harder challenge as a parent is to stay in the game after you don't get what you want.

I feel ya on the 'cool nerd' thing both my wife and I were that in college. I think you have the reasons about right.

My only issue with Palin was that she would support policies that affected OTHER people's ability to make choices. I feel bad for her kid, though. The guy's a loser... and that has nothing to do with politics.

Ultimately, I want every tool available. that includes sex education, readily available birth control, discussions about safe sex... and the ability to obtain RU-486 or a safe and legal abortion if necessary.

My son is 11 1/2. I don't know when his hormones are going to kick in. But when they do, I want him fully informed and fully able to make decisions. And if he screws up with regard to a decision, I hope it's something that we can deal with as a family to get him back on track.

I'm with you on that. I'm not on-board with the "social conservative" agenda in almost any way. I do believe in a pro-family agenda, but I feel like this has been pushed to extremes that Repubs would do better to pull back to positions that almost everyone can support. The are many centrist pro-family agenda items that get lost in the shuffle because neither party pay attention to them and we are worse off as a society because of it.

I'm also with you on the "all of the above" solution. You never know what will help or strike the right chord with your kid that will help them make the right decision when the time comes.

 

[jillian]

I'm with you on that. I'm not on-board with the "social conservative" agenda in almost any way. I do believe in a pro-family agenda, but I feel like this has been pushed to extremes that Repubs would do better to pull back to positions that almost everyone can support. The are many centrist pro-family agenda items that get lost in the shuffle because neither party pay attention to them and we are worse off as a society because of it.

I'm also with you on the "all of the above" solution. You never know what will help or strike the right chord with your kid that will help them make the right decision when the time comes.

yes, but I think you're also more libertarian than you are "republican" (whatever that is).Truth is, there are some people who really believe there is a "culture war" that they have to "win". This is just one of those issues they see as part of it. But as I said before, I understand the desire not to appear to condone adolescent sex....

I just don't think it's a realistic position.

 

[DiamondDave]

Again Jil.. this is not about the act of sex itself...

This is about the responsibility of the minor.. and the decision making for the minor.. which is indeed the responsibility of the parent...

Am I saying that the child should not be involved in the decision at age 17? No.. Quite the opposite, I am saying that that child should be giving their thoughts and everything in the discussion with their parents.. BUT.. because they are minors, the well being of the child is still the ultimate responsibility of the parent... if the parent and child reach the decision that this morning after pill is the way to go for them, I would not argue against that legally... just as I don't argue against people who get BC pills for their kids, even though it is not what I believe

This is not a culture war, or a war against sex, or trying to interject someone else's will upon the family with this issue... this is keeping responsibility where it belongs.. this is about nothing more than keeping the parent informed and involved in something dealing with the minor/child that they are indeed responsible for

 

[jillian]

Again Jil.. this is not about the act of sex itself...

This is about the responsibility of the minor.. and the decision making for the minor.. which is indeed the responsibility of the parent...

Am I saying that the child should not be involved in the decision at age 17? No.. Quite the opposite, I am saying that that child should be giving their thoughts and everything in the discussion with their parents.. BUT.. because they are minors, the well being of the child is still the ultimate responsibility of the parent... if the parent and child reach the decision that this morning after pill is the way to go for them, I would not argue against that legally... just as I don't argue against people who get BC pills for their kids, even though it is not what I believe

This is not a culture war, or a war against sex, or trying to interject someone else's will upon the family with this issue... this is keeping responsibility where it belongs.. this is about nothing more than keeping the parent informed and involved in something dealing with the minor/child that they are indeed responsible for

I know you see it as all of that. And in an ideal world, I'd be in 100% agreement with you. Maybe it's because I handled so many family law cases... dunno... I don't want judges to have to intervene to get a kid birth control, or an abortion, or the morning after pill. And I think restrictions (aside from physical safety) shouldn't be the province of government.

I also don't think kids will keep the parent informed either way. I think we have to be like stealth fighters.

 

[DiamondDave]

Again Jil.. this is not about the act of sex itself...

This is about the responsibility of the minor.. and the decision making for the minor.. which is indeed the responsibility of the parent...

Am I saying that the child should not be involved in the decision at age 17? No.. Quite the opposite, I am saying that that child should be giving their thoughts and everything in the discussion with their parents.. BUT.. because they are minors, the well being of the child is still the ultimate responsibility of the parent... if the parent and child reach the decision that this morning after pill is the way to go for them, I would not argue against that legally... just as I don't argue against people who get BC pills for their kids, even though it is not what I believe

This is not a culture war, or a war against sex, or trying to interject someone else's will upon the family with this issue... this is keeping responsibility where it belongs.. this is about nothing more than keeping the parent informed and involved in something dealing with the minor/child that they are indeed responsible for

I know you see it as all of that. And in an ideal world, I'd be in 100% agreement with you. Maybe it's because I handled so many family law cases... dunno... I don't want judges to have to intervene to get a kid birth control, or an abortion, or the morning after pill. And I think restrictions (aside from physical safety) shouldn't be the province of government.

I also don't think kids will keep the parent informed either way. I think we have to be like stealth fighters.

But that is NOT a judge's responsibility UNLESS the child is a ward of the court, which would happen if the parent is deemed unfit... and making a decision for your child that the child may or may not agree with does not make a parent unfit... it is the responsibility of the parent, for their child's care and well being, period... there is no argument of that unless you deem the minor/child emancipated from the parents or an adult

A judge does not have to intervene unless you are trying to make the government 'all powerful' with it's tendrils into even this very personal aspect of your family life and family responsibilities

 

[Tech_Esq]

I'm with you on that. I'm not on-board with the "social conservative" agenda in almost any way. I do believe in a pro-family agenda, but I feel like this has been pushed to extremes that Repubs would do better to pull back to positions that almost everyone can support. The are many centrist pro-family agenda items that get lost in the shuffle because neither party pay attention to them and we are worse off as a society because of it.

I'm also with you on the "all of the above" solution. You never know what will help or strike the right chord with your kid that will help them make the right decision when the time comes.

yes, but I think you're also more libertarian than you are "republican" (whatever that is).Truth is, there are some people who really believe there is a "culture war" that they have to "win". This is just one of those issues they see as part of it. But as I said before, I understand the desire not to appear to condone adolescent sex....

I just don't think it's a realistic position.

I agree on all points.

I'm not sure where I strike the balance on the morning after though. In general, I think that abortions by minors are medical procedures and should follow the strictures of all other medical procedures whatever they are. (Parental consent/notification -- judicial bypass). The pill presents a problem for me because it is not an invasive medical procedure. But, I'm not sure that it is without risk. If there is a substantial risk to the health of the girl, shouldn't the parents know in case something goes wrong? (I think hemorrhage is a possibility?). I would feel awful if my daughter were hemorrhaging and died and I knew nothing about any of it. Obviously.

I'm torn. Not sure what the right answer should be. I understand Dave's arguments and yours Jillian. I'm just not sure where I'm comfortable with that balance. If I was convinced it was as safe as aspirin, then I would make it legal.

 

[Care4all]

fyi FYI

I was confused myself on RU486 and Plan B, I thought they were the SAME, BUT they are NOT!

in case, anyone else was confused as me, here are some helpful links...

RU486Facts.org - Medical Information about RU-486 (Mifepristone)

Plan B®: Frequently Asked Questions

 

[jillian]

But that is NOT a judge's responsibility UNLESS the child is a ward of the court, which would happen if the parent is deemed unfit... and making a decision for your child that the child may or may not agree with does not make a parent unfit... it is the responsibility of the parent, for their child's care and well being, period... there is no argument of that unless you deem the minor/child emancipated from the parents or an adult

A judge does not have to intervene unless you are trying to make the government 'all powerful' with it's tendrils into even this very personal aspect of your family life and family responsibilities

But it IS a judge's province if the child can't go to the parent. In your scenario, if the child doesn't tell the parent, that's it...she has no options. The same way I don't think you can force a couple to have a good relationship by making them consult and agree on an abortion, I don't believe we can force our kids to confide in us. Believe me... I wish I could.

I agree on all points.

I'm not sure where I strike the balance on the morning after though. In general, I think that abortions by minors are medical procedures and should follow the strictures of all other medical procedures whatever they are. (Parental consent/notification -- judicial bypass). The pill presents a problem for me because it is not an invasive medical procedure. But, I'm not sure that it is without risk. If there is a substantial risk to the health of the girl, shouldn't the parents know in case something goes wrong? (I think hemorrhage is a possibility?). I would feel awful if my daughter were hemorrhaging and died and I knew nothing about any of it. Obviously.

I'm torn. Not sure what the right answer should be. I understand Dave's arguments and yours Jillian. I'm just not sure where I'm comfortable with that balance. If I was convinced it was as safe as aspirin, then I would make it legal.

Even Aspirin isn't safe sometimes. And if your child is also smoking, the pill could lead to stroke or heart attack... blood clots being far more likely than hemmorhage.... but you know what, they put all kinds of stuff in their bodies.... If they don't have to sneak around to get this stuff, they're more likely to be given proper medical advice and what to look for in terms of possible side effects. Plus, if they know their doctor doesn't have to tell their parents, I think they're more likely to call the doctor in the event something doesn't feel right after.

Am I right? Wrong? I don't know...