As you know, the US Government is going to allow 15 year-old teenage girls to obtain this medication over the counter without parental consent. Setting aside the moral debate, the legal question is what concerns me. The government is coming between a parent and their child. In fact the government is superseding a parents legal authority. On what legal grounds are they basing this decision? Edit; let me get this straight, you're comparing purchasing a soda with purchasing plan B? Please tell me you're young and I'll forgive you. @Claude Come on, I know you know better than that. Parents are the legal guardians of their children. Who owns them? The State! @Claude Come on, I know you know better than that. Parents are the legal guardians of their children. Who owns them? The State!
Best Answer:
Woody Red at 03 May,2013
MSNBC have been putting out stuff about how your children do not belong to you, but they belong to 'the collective' Wasn't a baby ripped out of a mothers arms in her own home the other day for no good reason by the police ?? you have some odd things happening in your country, my friend.
Other Answers:
- "The government is coming between a parent and their child."
No more or less than what they do in school kid. Deal. - A 15 year old teenager can legally buy a Coca-Cola over the counter, whether his or her parents allow their children to drink soda or not.
So it's hardly like this is without precedent!!
@Fall of Man: I'm comparing purchasing Plan B to purchasing any of the millions of things a parent might disapprove of. Whether that's thong underwear or squirt guns or Dubstep CDs or posters of Kate Upton.
Of course, those four things, unlike Coca-Cola, aren't absolute poison. - I don't see how this is a legal issue. They are basing the long-ago-made decision on the fact that under-aged people are also consumers.
- MSNBC have been putting out stuff about how your children do not belong to you, but they belong to 'the collective'
Wasn't a baby ripped out of a mothers arms in her own home the other day for no good reason by the police ??
you have some odd things happening in your country, my friend. - Since when is it written down in stone that a fifteen year old has to discuss her sex life with her parents and furthermore have parental consent for medication?
That's ridiculous.
Mistakes happen and people have sex whatever the 'rules'.
A fifteen year old girl's sex life is not necessarily any of her parents' business and delayed contraception is a brilliant idea for those mistakes that cause unwanted pregnancies, abortions, unwanted children etc. - Hm... I'm not sure I see where parental authority comes into play here. Plan B is over the counter now, and parents don't have to give their permission for a child to purchase other OTC medications. At least in my state, there are no laws requiring parents to give permission for their kids to buy condoms, either, so it being a form of contraception doesn't have much weight.
Do you feel that the government was in error when it made Plan B OTC because of medical reasons? If so, that might be the best argument to make.
@Common Sense: The same measure The Fall of Man is discussing also makes it prescription-free for minors. http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/15270-fda-approves-sale-of-plan-b-one-step-to-minors-without-prescription - Why is plan B different from any other contraceptive? How is it different from soda?
- Is there a moral debate? You think preventing a pregnancy is immoral?
"On what legal grounds are they basing this decision?"
The same ones that allow anyone to buy Midol or condoms. - It doesn't really make much sense because a 15-year old would need a doctor's note or parental permission to buy a lot of things in a drugstore, but not plan B now. There's an agenda here. Heck an adult can't buy too much cold medicine now without getting suspicious looks.
- The legal issue I see is that parents have legal obligations to their minor children. That is in part because it is deemed that minors do not have the same decision making ability that adults do. For that reason it seems to me, parents should legally have knowledge (and say in) of any prescription drugs their minor children may be taking.
Plan B is a prescription drug for minors.(1) (And regarding that changing, I disagree that should change for political agenda reasons.)
It is also a drug that has some potential issues with allergies, possible contraindications, and can can cause increased risk with certain conditions. Certainly a parent who has legal responsibilities to a child should know these things. Imagine, a parent, not knowing a child is on this drug does something or gives the child something that is incompatible with this drug.
~ - Fine by me. Its the government's job to protect the welfare of its citizens, and that includes children. The sad thing is that so many young girls have to be protected from their parents, who would prevent their access to birth control and force them to give birth to unwanted babies.
- None because there is no crime. It's not a crime for a minor to have sex. It's not a crime for a minor to get pregnant. It is not a crime for a minor to have access to contraception or abortion. It is not a crime for a child to be given medical treatment when needed. When a child is in a car accident and taken to the ER they don't wait for the parents to show to say it's okay to save my child's life.
- IF the parent had done their job, the 15 year old would NOT be pregnant.
having a 15 year BE pregnant, has demonstrated their lack of parenting ability.
so the state HAS TO STEP IN.
next? - Do you feel a parent can mandate an abortion for a pregnant 15 year old that does not want an abortion? Can they legally force that upon her?
If the parent doesn't have that legal right, they don't have the right to force a 15 year old to stay pregnant when she does not wish to. There's really no basis to assume a parent's rights over their child extends to that child's reproductive abilities.