NBC's Costello falsely reported conservative Concerned Women for America "advocates" allowing Plan B with age restrictions
SUMMARY: In a July 31 report on the Food and Drug Administration's purported endorsement of the over-the-counter sale of the "morning-after" pill, or Plan B, for women 18 and older, NBC News correspondent Tom Costello falsely reported that the conservative Concerned Women for America "advocates" allowing women 18 and older to obtain the drug.
During a report on the July 31 edition of NBC's Nightly News, NBC News correspondent Tom Costello falsely reported that the conservative Concerned Women for America (CWA) "advocates" allowing women 18 and older to obtain the "morning-after" pill, or Plan B, a proposal the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reportedly may now approve. As purported evidence, Costello aired a statement by CWA president Wendy Wright, in which she said, "Our greatest concern about making Plan B over the counter is that it will end up harming women's health and be especially dangerous to young women, to adolescents." In fact, Wright's statement is consistent with a July 31 CWA press release announcing the organization's opposition to the proposal to place an age restriction on the over-the-counter sale of Plan B; in that press release, Wright said, "Any scheme based on who buys the drug is absolutely meaningless" because "[a]nyone, man or woman, over 18 could buy the drug and turn around -- even in the store -- and give it to a 13-year old."
From the July 31 edition of NBC's Nightly News with Brian Williams:
COSTELLO: The FDA denies that it's politicized the process even though its top women's health scientist resigned in protest. But today, a change. With his confirmation hearings just a day away, [acting FDA commissioner] Dr. [Andrew] von Eschenbach indicated in a letter that he might approve over-the-counter access to Plan B, but require that it be kept behind pharmacy counters and only for women 18 and older, the same age that at least one conservative Christian group advocates.
WRIGHT: Our greatest concern about making Plan B over the counter is that it will end up harming women's health and be especially dangerous to young women, to adolescents.
Never in the history of the FDA has any drug had to overcome such a "moral" hurdle. Imagine if the FDA regulated ALL drugs with the concern that some child somewhere sometime might consume it. We would have no drugs anywhere, since there is no feasible way to regulate drugs once in the hands of the consumer, besides prosecuting the consumer for illegal distribution, which any reasonable person knows is a total waste of resources and time.
This is what happens when religion and government mix.
WRIGHT: Our greatest concern about making Plan B over the counter is that it will end up harming women's health and be especially dangerous to young women, to adolescents.
Translation: we really, really want those possible fertilized cells to develop into children and damn the consequences.
I wonder what this conservative group's view is on the HPV vaccine... you know, the one which could prevent MILLIONS of cervical cancer, but one which many are afraid will lead to young women having.....gawd forbid.....shhhhh.. S E X
that young women might have sex and not get pregnant, get cancer and die, or both.
i dont understand why liberals dont see the big picture. these women dont have to get hpv, cancer, or pregnant if they don't want to. if they act responsibly and don't sleep around, they won't contract hpv and therefore they will not get cervical cancer due to it.
you two seem to be looking at this in an overly simplistic fashion (i don't mean to be insulting or condescending). i gather your point of view is this -- there is a vaccine to prevent hpv, a disease that causes cancer and death. therefore conservatives are evil and primative for not wanting to prevent cancer.
it isn't that we are evil, we just don't think people should be having sex without fear of consequences, and since the disease is avoidable by abstaining, we fear that it will lead to an increase in sexual promiscuity among teens who are vaccinated. I'm all for curing the disease, but we already have a way of preventing it - and that is not having sex with multiple partners and abstaining until marriage.
I am a fair conservative. A fair compromise would be to give girls this vaccine but had them take abstinence classes to go along with it. Would you guys be willing to go along with that or is teaching abstinence too close to "imposing one's morals on another"
Abstinence classes are likely to be as ineffectual as a "Just say no!" campaign. In a perfect world all the women are virtuous and all the men are kind (among many other things), but we don't live in a perfect world. Premarital sex, as well as abortion I am sure, have been with us since antiquity. Unwanted teenage pregnanciess occur in even the most virtuous of families. Although, as a reasonable liberal, I agree somewhat with your sentiments I don't think abstinence classes are the answer.
i gather your point of view is this -- there is a vaccine to prevent hpv, a disease that causes cancer and death. therefore conservatives are evil and primative for not wanting to prevent cancer.
I'd say "woefully misguided" instead of evil and primitive, but otherwise that's accurate.
it isn't that we are evil, we just don't think people should be having sex without fear of consequences
Nobody thinks people should be having sex without fear of consequences. But they're going to anyway, no matter what you or I think.
...and since the disease is avoidable by abstaining, we fear that it will lead to an increase in sexual promiscuity among teens who are vaccinated.
Two points: (1) what's your basis for thinking that? (2) So what if it does?
I'm all for curing the disease, but we already have a way of preventing it - and that is not having sex with multiple partners and abstaining until marriage.
That's not a medical reason to deny people access to a medication that the FDA has found to be safe.
I am a fair conservative. A fair compromise would be to give girls this vaccine but had them take abstinence classes to go along with it.
Those are entirely separate issues. Whether your school district teaches abstinance classes is up to the school district. They are free to do what the people who live in that district want. FDA approval of a drug is supposed to be scientific in nature; it should not be conditioned on some kind of policy compromise. That's the whole problem. The Religious Right does not (or should not) have veto power over FDA decisions.
Would you guys be willing to go along with that or is teaching abstinence too close to "imposing one's morals on another"
It is imposing one's morals on another. But teaching abstinance is up to your school board, and is a separate issue from FDA approval of drugs.
But teaching abstinance is up to your school board, and is a separate issue from FDA approval of drugs.
It is up to the parents, PERIOD. Too many parents blame issues their kids are having on anything but themselves. Parents these days have become lazy. Kids are more promiscuous then ever.
I meant that it is up to the School Board whether or not to teach abstinance classes as part of the curriculum. Of course you're correct - teaching kids about personal choices like this is really the parents' responsibility.
The reality is that you're talking about adults making decisions on their daughters health, and assuming that their daughters are going to heed and obey every word that the parent imparts to them.
That is the most unrealistic concept that I've ever heard. No parent has ever advised their children to engage in pre-marital sexual relations. Every parent should have talked to their children about sex and the dangers involved in pre-marital sex. If they have, then why are so many children engaging in sexual relations? They don't all seem to be following the example and lessons taught by their parents and churces. For that reason alone, every young girl should be allowed to get this vaccine.
Any opinion that disagrees with this position, is an opinion made without logic or reason and with only the parents self righteousness in mind.
The reality is that you're talking about adults making decisions on their daughters health, That is the job of the parent. You can feed youkid a good solid home cooked meal, or take them to Mc Death.
and assuming that their daughters are going to heed and obey every word that the parent imparts to them. No argument there That is the most unrealistic concept that I've ever heard. No parent has ever advised their children to engage in pre-marital sexual relations. No parent, got proof? Every parent should have talked to their children about sex and the dangers involved in pre-marital sex. rarely happens
If they have, then why are so many children engaging in sexual relations? They don't all seem to be following the example and lessons taught by their parents and churces. Because it is not taught to the majority. Look around, where do you live?
For that reason alone, every young girl should be allowed to get this vaccine. Like the smallpox vaccine? I wholeheartedly disagree... Any opinion that disagrees with this position, is an opinion made without logic or reason and with only the parents self righteousness in mind. You sound like a right winger.....
So it's appropriate to deny a potentially lifesaving vaccine to young women - effectively sentencing some of them to death - to prove a point to their irresponsible parents? That is unbelievably callous and immoral. I can't believe you really think that.
If it is indeed a health issue runing rampid then yes, they should get it. But it is not at that stage, is it?
what the extent of the problem is, but I'm not sure how that would change decision-making.
It is free to take a vaccination. I would give it to my girl, when (for whatever reason) she could get cancer than can be prevented. If you do not want to give it to your girls, be my guest. That is the whole issue of imposing faith on the US population: you want to deny a whole population something that can prevent an illness because you believe that sexuality (for girls!!!!) should have fear. I think otherwise: sexuality is pleasant and great fun!
...founded and run by a man?
that man is gay?
... continuing proof of the snide, paternalistic (false) superiority of the "Christian"'s concerns for the health of young, adolescent women. Allowing these very women the unqualified right to choose their own method of birth control and the open availability of safe pregnancy termination methods would challenge their own perceived powers over others that so many "Christians" in this country demand. Jesus never decried abortion! Jesus never said a word about the sacredness of the fetus! Twisting the ancient vague, poetic language of the very limited, voted-on books of the Bible to take on the meanings you want it to have today is the worst kind of dishonesty practiced by these oh-so-moral groups. Anyone who does not have a womb should just stay out of it. Remember, Viagra flew through the FDA approval process, didn't it?
I've seen Christian pamphlets depicting God as faceless- a blank effulgence where the face would be. Or Jesus in a three-piece suit and business haircut preaching to children in a meadow. Christians absolutely hate sex in any form. Any organization which misuses America or freedom in the title should have to change the name to reflect the actual position-i.e. Confused Women for Fundamentalism more appropriate title. White conservative Christians really don't like unchecked breeding of nonwhites.
While I would prefer to see "Plan B" used instead of an abortion it think it needs to stay presriction only. It is another license to live irresponsibly. Many girls out there would use it as their regular birth control instead of the intended use. Due to various medical conditions may girls are not able to take OCP's. Plan B is a mega dose OCP, so it may cause serious adverse reactions, especially overuse. If it so safe OTC, why do MD's need to prescribe standard oral contraceptives?
I work in Women's Health and can tell you many women an girls have no clue what they are doing when it comes to their sex lives. This will only increase the STD rate and potentially cause serious medical issues for the patient. It needs to stay prescription!!
I have never heard a woman's health care worker say Plan B is a bad idea, either in life, broadcast media, or print.
Still I only have only one question will its approval provide more misinformation regarding the transmission of STD's and pregnancies than abstience-only sex education that is being pushed into schools. Personally, I think teaching personal responsibility in one's sex life is brillant -- but I am married, a parent, and almost 40 -- however, what passes as "fact" in these class is in some cases laughable. So is the idea all teenagers will stop have sex if a 40 year old tells them it is a bad idea. Do women understand their own "sex lives", maybe not but I doubt most men do either. That being said isn't it a good idea to allow for those choices which could lead to major life issues to be regulated by the persons involved as much as possible.
Of course, it could be argued that "Plan B" will explode sexual activity in young people. However, it can also be shown through research that teenagers who sign abstience pledges are more likely to try anal and oral sex. Not exactly what was intended I am sure, but I doubt anyone would say that passing on the idea you should wait until marriage for sex is a bad idea.
ufleirx, If you read it again you will notice I did NOT say I was against Plan-B, I said I was against approving it for over the counter purchase. I work in women's Health and have been for 10 years. ( Clarification: women's health means more than abortion) the can be serious consquences to this medication. Girls younger than 18 will get it so putting a age restriction on it is a waste of time.
I guess when you see & hear the stories of young girls and irresponsible women everyday your eyes are opened to the lack of self respect and personal responsibilty in some. As I said before, my main concern about the unrestricted use fo this medication is the potential for abuse. Many will feel a false sense of security and the STD rate may go up, young people think oral/anal sex is the answer to their problems, but once again only more problems arise from that. Bottom line, holding youself to a higher standard-it works everytime.
"I guess when you see & hear the stories of young girls and irresponsible women everyday your eyes are opened to the lack of self respect and personal responsibilty in some."
How in the world would making Plan B a prescription drug have any effect on that?
Why aren't birth control pills over the counter? How about Vicodin? Because the doc can provide better education and control over the medication. Trust me when I say some women would take this pill everytime they have sex. This can be dangerous. By the way, Plan B is available by prescription now and seems to be working fine.
can be a better source of info than the doc. And as for believe me ... I do not believe anything without numbers. And when you say that Plan B can be used so people can continue with their irresponsible life I will not believe you more when you come up with any argument. It is a differentiation how we would like people to be, but some are indeed irresponsible and will continue to make the same mistake. As far as I know, simple pain killers can have worse negative consequences than Plan B.
Yellow Bird, While I do not claim to be an expert, I have worked in the Women's Health field for 10 years. I call girls to tell them a need to order an antibiotic because the have chlamydia and their only question is when can they have sex again. I ahve walked into a hospital room and interrupted a pregnant patient "servicing" her boyfriend. I have patients who call on Tuesday saying they had sex last night and want to know if I can tell if they are pregnant or not... I have 18 year old patients who have been trying to get pregnant since 15. IForgive me when I feel concerned about this drug being available at a whim. I may have figures, but I do have experience.
I don't know the full ramifications were someone to "abuse" this prescription. Can you abuse contraception? I guess you could but I have no idea how or why. However, I don't remember making the assertion that women's health only concerns abortion. We were just dicussing "Plan B" and so that is what some of my statements addressed -- I don't think I even mentioned abortion. I don't even think that I've heard a health provider call it (the morning after pill) abortion -- most I believe consider it contraception due to time passed were it is effective and safe -- 24 to 72 hours. I guess at closer 72 hours there could technically be "an abortion" but I did not mention it in my previous posting.
As for personal responsibility, I said I am all for it. However, realistically speaking I can estimate a sizable number of teens will have sex so we as a society should be realistic.
As for the rest, I still say there is no medication that will raise the threat of STD or unwanted pregnancies as much as the current woeful state of sexual education among young people. This is due the the abstience only policies this administration has put into place. Your own example of people not understanding that "Plan B" is not able to prevent STD's I think adequately shows this. Like most things, including hoping to limit the use of "Plan B", education will work better than prohibition -- hopefully in preventing both STD's and pregnancies.
I am absolutely fascinated when a group that is against abortion opposed a drug that experts indicate could cut the abortion rate in this country by over 50%.
I think we are getting some evidence of their real purpose which is to ban sex for anyone other than married couples who want to have a child nine months from now.
No on would argue that discourageing children having sex is a bad idea, but it sure beats 16 year old girls becoming pregnant, dropping out of school and trying to raise a child on a minimum wage job. However, there is absolutely no evidence that there is increased sexual activity when prevention of pregnancy is available. If there was we wouldn't see so many pregnant teenagers.
However, there is absolutely no evidence that there is increased sexual activity when prevention of pregnancy is available.
Is there evidence proving otherwise?
up to the parent.
I have a friend, his parents from a young age prepped him for his sexual promiscuity. They used to keep condoms in their drwar and his father talked about them with him. He told him how they practiced using protection. He grew up using condoms every single time.
A pill will never be the answer to safe sex, PERIOD!
Wright: "Our greatest concern about making Plan B over the counter is that it will end up harming women's health and be especially dangerous to young women, to adolescents"
It is a quick sentence, but there is nothing in it. What dangers and what harm of health for the taker? Plan B is a last resort when anything happens during sex and you do not want to end up pregnant (as a woman). Plan B should be taken as quickly as possible to be most effective. Any delay by going for a prescription ("you can come in in three days"), is a loss of time.
I am not so concerned that a lot of women will use it instead of the regular pill, because (as far as I know) you can get sick as hell from the morning after pill. However, perhaps when sexuality would be more discussed in school and at home, more girls would start taking the pill to prevent pregnancies, and more guys would use condoms. However, in a stable relationship where it is known that both partners have no sexually transmittable illnesses, the pill can be enough, unless the woman forget to take the pill. It si nice to see that Plan B is being associated with having sex with eveyone and everywhere (not my business, I would say, so why would I want to prevent that?), and with teenage sexuality (again, some kids are ready sooner than others, or are in bad socioeconimic situations where sexuality is an issue at an earlier age).
The doctor's office can call it into the pharmacy. The delay issue isn't a real concern.
of the concerns. Within 24 hours means as quickly as possible. What is easier than to get it without a prescription. The abuse potential is zero: no woman will get addicted to Plan B. It is a safety option.
Actually, you can take Plan B up to 72 hrs after intercourse so yes, you can wait for a doctor to call it in.
Plan B "addiction" isn't the concern, it is "misuse". How often can a woman take it and not risk serious health effects? We don't no wbecause there have been no official studies on it. One on the doctors I work with counciled a patient for taking PlanB twice in 3 months. How safe it is for a 13 yr old? Again, we don't know.
As I said before, some women due to medical history cannot take OCP's. This is one of the reasons they are prescribed by a physician. Why then would anyone think a large dose of hormones taken without medical supervision would be perfectly safe.