I caught some grief over the fact that I thought Sebelius made the correct judgment call to make Plan B available to minors only if they have a prescription. Here, I intend to defend my stance.
Plan B is a pill that changes the chemistry within a person that can biologically bear children. If that person is underage, more times than not, they are living at home with their parents. The eventual, logical question that remains here is, "Why are they still living at home if they are of child-bearing age?"
Simply, they are not yet capable to deal with any other stresses than they have with them already. Trying to make the grade in school, having friends that can also influence them (peer pressures), etc. At some point, which I'm not sure where it happened, we figured out that teenagers aren't properly suited to raise children. This is especially true with the emphasis we have put on education. Being educated is a main driver of our republic, as it means a great deal to have as many citizens as possible to be informed enough to make a decision on who our elected officials should be.
If Sebelius would've allowed it to pass, that is, make Plan B accessible as an over-the-counter drug, it would've taken any parents that may object out of the equation. Someone may say, as they did, "why do you want your view to be imposed via law?"
I counter the question with, "Well, it WASN'T law. It was regulation." I wholeheartedly object to people that are now in power telling me how to do ANYTHING while I didn't have a vote for them. That's the simple part of my argument. Furthermore, I object that the state can tell my children that they can go above my head.
I was told, in not so many words, that parents aren't perfect and the world isn't, itself. I wholeheartedly agree with this. I am not a perfect parent, my mother and father weren't perfect parents, and there is no such thing as a perfect parent. The world is imperfect, and cannot be perfected, in my opinion. However, there is such a thing as learned life. The longer you are on this beautiful planet and interact with more and more people, you develop a sense of propriety that is functional within the society you dwell.
Teenagers, as great as they are, go through a CRAZY change within their lives at this time; we usually call it puberty. In this time there so many emotions that are hard to deal with, that you need people to look to and ask questions about it. This is where the parent comes in, as is the same during the young years for whatever problems you may not understand.
I ask this question: If parents aren't going to have any say in their child's reproduction, then why do the children still reside with the parent? Obviously the teenager must be of a suitable age that they can take care of any offspring that they may have, correct? They can provide for them on their own, feed them, and make sure there is a roof over their head, right?
Well of course not. Being capable of reproduction doesn't make you mentally or financially fit, or responsible enough to take care of a child. This is pretty much a given. So now the answer seems to lie in a pill that changes how the female body chemistry works. There are others that do the same (birth control pills), but this takes effect once you take them, and changes your natural cycles right away. What happens when this becomes habit, I ask?
The use of a condom is generally how people avoid pregnancies, but what if a condom isn't used? Most people have heard that it feels entirely different, for both the man and woman to have sex without a condom, be it true or not. This is something that you may have heard from your peers in school, or even from media such as Hollywood.
The laws of unintended consequences leads me to believe that eventually teens would abandon condom use because they have Plan B on their side. Why wouldn't they? Being an emotional wreck, why not? You want to please the other one you are with and not make a fuss. I mean, "what are you, a square, man?" Peer pressure is a bitch during those tender years. And with these pills being used to make sure there were no pregnancies, what else could happen?
STDs. I am positive that STDs would rise even more than before should teens have the ability to purchase these pills without a perscription, which would require parental consent. This is, of course, a health issue that could devastate everyone. I would like to hear responses to my thoughts in this regard.
Before I go, though, I would also like to hear a response to the role of the parents. If we just allow children, of teenage years, to take these pills while having sex, which would amount to the government sanctioning these acts without the will of the parents to have a say, who is it that really has paternal control?
Cross-posted at my personal site.