On Thursday the Food and Drug Administration announced the approval of the contraceptive treatment commonly known as 'Plan B' for over the counter sale to anyone over the age of 18.
The controversial drug, manufactured by the Duramed division of Barr Pharmaceuticals, uses the same basic ingredients as standard birth control pills in higher dosage and is designed to prevent conception if taken within 3 days of possible insemination. The treatment is 89% effective in preventing pregnancy.
Contraception advocates had argued that having Plan B available only by prescription made it essentially useless because of the difficulty of getting and filling a prescription during the limited time during which it is effective.
Plan B differs from abortifacients like RU-486 because it prevents conception rather than causing a spontaneous abortion after conception. Despite this vital difference, anti-abortion activists have been outspoken in opposition to the drug's approval, arguing that fertilization takes place more rapidly than supporters of the drug contend and that it was effectively just another form of abortion pill.
The other common argument against Plan B is that it will lead to a rise in sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS, because it removes one of the main negative consequences of promiscuity.
This argument gets to the heart of the religiously motivated opposition to this and all other forms of contraception — the belief that the separation of sex and child-bearing is unnatural and sinful, a position which goes far beyond mere opposition to abortion.
Plan B opponents are particularly displeased with President Bush, whose lip service to the anti-sex movement has never been more transparent. In a press conference on Monday, he expressed his support for acting FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach and for over the counter sales of Plan B prior to the official approval decision.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Brent
Well put. I find myself being a pro-lifer, but I don't see the problem with Plan B. I find myself leaning conservative and actively religious as an Evangelical Christian (shock! guffaw!), but don't find these pundits remotely sensible.
The "neopuritanical" movement as I have observed it growing up and remaining within or around these circles are dangerous, not necessarily in terms of abstinence, but in consideration of the unhealthy sexual repression and or taboo still prevalent within. (True Love Waits and other abstinence ploys are highly counter-productive. Studies have shown validated this.) I am not going to advocate wanton sexual attitudes, that won't solve the problem. But at the very least, open and honest dialogue about sexual issues would be a step in the right direction. I grow tired of speaking in frank, honest sexual terms and watching Christians bite their lips and giggle when they hear 'vagina'.
Instead of a healthy, proactive solution, we Christians do what we have always done: we condemn the lusts of human nature while committing a greater sin: willingly abetting our ignorance of the world around us thinking we are better than those evil, lustful sinners. Something about specks and planks and eyes...
2 - Brent
And, of course, I should have previewed before posting. Holy typos! I stand ashamed.
3 - Dawn
Well, gee, finally something that has happened during this administration that's in the best interest of the country.
4 - Bliffle
The willingness of christians to snoop in and interfere in other peoples private lives never ceases to amaze me.
5 - Clavos
The religious right has done a good job of mis-characterizing the way in which Plan B works.
Than you, Dave for dispelling that important bit of misinformation.
The compromise over prescriptions is, like most compromises, a joke. Surely everyone can remember getting an older friend to buy beer for them when they were too young to buy it themselves.
6 - Dave Nalle
I think that the opposition to Plan B shows how hypocritical pro-lifers really are, because every use of this drug prevents a true abortion, which they ought to view as a good thing. The fact that they don't demonstrates pretty clearly that they are not pro-life but rather anti-sex. That's why I chose to use the term Neopuritan in the article.
Dave
7 - DaveL
This may be the pivotal event that eventually causes abortion to stop being the issue behind one issue voters. How many major elections would the right have won in the last few years without the "Pro-Life" vote? Now those politicians will have to do more than just point to their Godless pro choice opponents. Maybe now we will have an opportunity to put these devisive issues aside and start working together for a better world.
Well anyway, I can dream.
8 - Dave Nalle
How many major elections would the right have won in the last few years without the "Pro-Life" vote?
IMO a hell of a lot more, because for every pro-life vote there's at least one pro-choice counter vote, and focusing on the abortion issue has caused them to neglect far more important issues they could campaign on and win with much greater consistency.
Dave
9 - Peter J
Good article Dave,
I have only my own personal beliefs in regards to abortion and they don't bend to politics or religion. I oppose abortion.
That is for myself but since I won't ever have to worry about having one it is a moot point.
I am very much pro-choice. It is, I believe, a woman's prerogative to do with her body as she sees fit, especially when she is backed up by the law.
I have to say that Bush has finally done something right, (in my opinion) no matter what his agenda.
It is no doubt a small battle won for women's rights. As you said, this is not a matter that even belongs in our legal system.
I'm surprised that no one has yet tried to block men's vasectomies. There is no place that the religious extreme will not go. I believe that it is more a matter of power than of true belief.
There are millions upon millions of religious people who honor their religion and their God who don't find it necessary to force their beliefs on others.
10 - Clavos
There are millions upon millions of religious people who honor their religion and their God who don't find it necessary to force their beliefs on others.
Well said, Peter. I'm afraid that in this era of religious extremism grabbing all the headlines, we all tend to lose sight of that a bit.
11 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
#7 I don't think this is going to change the mind of any of the one issue voters. People voting solely on the abortion issue are not going to be changed by this. Either you believe it is murder or you dont and you vote solely for the candidate that shares your view. That has not changed. And the GOP candidates will continue to take the same pro-life vote it got in 04.
What it may change, is the face of the pro-life movement. Perhaps people will be less inclined to vote for the religious zealots opposed to plan B, and more inclined to vote for more sensible pro-life candidates. If Bush and the rest of the pro-life movement demonstrate a modicum of sensibility on religious issues and stick strictly to abortion, there credibility and support will go up. That will only heighten the opposition of liberals and make abortion a more devisive issue. No one's giving an inch on abortion, to almost half of America it's an issue of life and death, and to the other half, it's an issue of constitutional freedom.
12 - Dave Nalle
When did half the public become ragin pro-life zealots, PETI? I thought the numbers were quite a bit lower than that. Are you perhaps confusing those who oppose abortion on general grounds but don't use it as their sole issue for voting with the true one-issue voter zealots who think it's murder?
For my money anyone with an extreme one-issue voter position on abortion from either side ought to be locked up at election time. That kind of idiocy does nothing good for the election process.
Dave
13 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
Well i said "to half of americans it is an issue of life and death," but just because they believe it is an issue of life and death, doesnt mean they believe it is murder or are raging pro-life zealots. But I suppose the phrasing is a little too exclusive because my near half ballpark figure is for general opposition to abortion.
Personally, I have a lot of respect for the one issue abortion voter. If you truly believe it is murder, then it takes guts to put aside all the other garbage going on in this country and vote solely for the millions of aborted fertilized eggs each year in the U.S. against any other inclination you might have.
I know a one issue abortion voter who vomits at Bush's usurption of power and waging of useless wars, but votes for Bush anyways because the millions of aborted fertilized eggs "murdered" each year, far out number any loss of life in Iraq.
Why they believe it is murder is another matter...
14 - JR
Dave Nalle: When did half the public become ragin pro-life zealots, PETI?
After the anti-abortion movement was egged on by the Republican Party for twenty-five years.
15 - Dave Nalle
JR, contrary to you delusion, the Republican Party does not have a magical ability to alter reality or cause huge numbers of people to become fanatical cultists.
Dave
16 - David Flanagan
Dave,
I'm a pro-lifer though, I'll admit, I have not been keeping close tabs on Plan B. With that said, I think that pro-lifers object to Plan B because, while it prevents the implantation of the ovum, it does not prevent conception itself.
The sperm combines with the egg, forms a human zygote, which is the point at which all human life begins, then the Plan B treatment prevents the implantation of the zygote and, thereby, prevents the pregnancy.
If you think about it, pro-life thinking on this issue is very consistent as these are the same folks who argue against the destruction of embryoes for stem cell research. Thankfully, it looks as if a new method of research in this area no longer destroys the embryoes in the process.
Anyway, please correct me if I'm wrong here.
Thanks,
David
17 - David Flanagan
Oops! Forgot to mention, a treatment which does not prevent conception is not a "contra-ceptive." So calling it a new contraceptive treatment is inaccurate. Technically, conception has always been described as the point where the sperm cell combines with the ova, forming the zygote, which later becomes the embryo.
Thanks.
18 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
If life begins when sperm combines with the egg, why is it that a fertilized egg frequently does not attach to the uterine wall and is flushed down the toilet? This happens millions of times a year, so theoretically we are disposing of millions of "human lives" in the largest mass genocide of the innocents in human history.
Also Dave seems to suggest in the article that plan B prevents fertilization ("it prevents conception" and he mentions the fact that opponents of the drug believe fertilization happens faster than supporters of the drug claim and that it is an abortive) and is in fact, a contraceptive. I dont really know, ill let Dave sort that out, but if he is correct it would render your entire objection moot (I had to say it - better Dave?).
19 - David
If conception does not occur, then of course my point is moot. But that's not what happens.
Plan B prevents the zygote from implanting in the womb by making the woman's body think that she is already pregnant. And arguing that this process already happens naturally anyway is silly.
I could take that same reasoning and use it to justify any number of atrocities. You know, the spotted owl was in decline anyway, we're just helping it on it's way to extinction. And don't argue that it's endangered because of us. Exctinctions were normal long before humans arrived, they are normal now.
I think the question that needs to be asked is, are we accountable or not? People want to hold the President for all the lives lost in Iraq, but we don't want to personally responsible for all the lives in this country that never were.
Thanks.
20 - David
If conception does not occur, then of course my point is moot. But that's not what happens.
Plan B prevents the zygote from implanting in the womb by making the woman's body think that she is already pregnant. And arguing that this process already happens naturally anyway is silly.
I could take that same reasoning and use it to justify any number of atrocities. You know, the spotted owl was in decline anyway, we're just helping it on it's way to extinction. And don't argue that it's endangered because of us. Exctinctions were normal long before humans arrived, they are normal now.
I think the question that needs to be asked is, are we accountable or not? People want to hold the President for all the lives lost in Iraq, but we don't want to personally responsible for all the lives in this country that never were.
Thanks.
21 - Clavos
David says:
I think that pro-lifers object to Plan B because, while it prevents the implantation of the ovum, it does not prevent conception itself.
What the manufacturer says on its website:
Plan B® works like a regular birth control pill. It prevents pregnancy mainly by stopping the release of an egg from the ovary, and may also prevent the fertilization of an egg (the uniting of sperm with the egg). Plan B® may also work by preventing it from attaching to the uterus (womb).
So, according to the above, Plan B works in up to three ways, two of which definitely prevent fertilization.
22 - JR
David Flanagan: If you think about it, pro-life thinking on this issue is very consistent as these are the same folks who argue against the destruction of embryoes for stem cell research.
Not unless those same folks are even more vociferous in their arguments against the vastly more prolific destruction of embryos in fertility clinics.
23 - Peter J
Although I am anti-abortion I am 100% pro choice.
We seem to be forgetting the key word; choice.
If you chose, even on this one issue, to take a so called pro-life stance and allow this to affect your politics then you have taken one major step toward relinquishing any or all freedoms of choice.
I can understand finding the concept of term abortion ''sinful' even though I am not a 'religious' person but there are other methods of control that I personally have no problem with. Other forms of contraception ranging from prophylactic devices to birth control pills, even as far as 'Plan B' are methods that I personally approve of.
I find the actual abortion of a several month old fetus out of my personal approval range but this is entirely my personal belief, having nothing to do with anyone but myself. I dare say that in my own life I could not deal with an abortion but my wife may not feel the same. This is why we take precautions, we'll never know what it's like.
The same 'rules' apply to the death sentence. It's the same story, same agenda although it's almost become cliche'; everyone is against the death sentence until his own daughter is horribly raped and brutally murdered. Don't be too quick to make these decisions.
Do not be emotionally twisted into giving up any personal freedoms. Before you make ANY choice on any position that falls under the laws of God keep in mind that God has his own agenda, this is why you have been given 'freedom of choice', not freedom of making other peoples choice. Worry about your own soul.
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
24 - Dave Nalle
I like to describe myself as 'pro-death'. I'm all for abortion, contraception, preventing fertilization and exposing small children on hillsides for the wolves to eat. I'm also in favor of the death penalty and unplugging human vegetables with great enthusiasm.
But I do understand the ethical objections to abortion, and acknowledge that they are reasonable up to a point. That point is where the rights of the fetus or cell cluster interfere with the rights of the mother, whose rights have to be considered superior because her existence and value as a human being are proven and real, and reality trumps potentiality.
Religion should play a role in one's personal position on abortion, but it should not play a role in legal policy on abortion, or on anything else. That amounts to imposing the beliefs of one religion on the entire population, and that's clearly both unethical and illegal.
Dave
25 - Peter J
Good one Dave!