Local reaction to FDA’s decision to change purchase age of Plan B One-Step

Tags: , , , ,

Submitted: Wed, 05/01/2013 - 3:08am
Updated: Wed, 05/01/2013 - 1:08pm

WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) – The Food and Drug Administration lowered the age a woman can purchase the morning after pill on Tuesday.

Girls as young as 15, can buy the emergency contraceptive without a prescription.

Earlier this month, a ruling by a federal judge instructed the FDA to lift all age restrictions on the pill. The FDA says its decision is independent of the court case.

“Fifteen seems awfully young. I think that anyone that age is a child, you know that’s still a child,” Kyra Tebow said.

Women 17 years and older could buy the pill over-the-counter before the FDA changed the age requirements.

“Women of all ages should have access to emergency contraception if and when they need it so they can prevent an unintended pregnancy,” Emily Callen of North Carolina Plan Parenthood Field Coordinator said.

The FDA says the contraceptive will sit on the shelves in the pharmacy, in the family planning or female health aisles.

“It’s not giving the kids any values or morals or anything like that. I just don’t agree with it at all,” mother Amanda Pitts said.

Sex education is the most important way to combat this issue according to Kae Livsey of the UNCW School of Nursing in the College of Health and Human Services.

“What we want to do is prevent them from ever needing Plan B, because they have a plan A,” Livsey said.

The pill goes for about 50 dollars and does not protect against sexually transmitted diseases.


  • Vog46 says:

    Here’s the problem.
    This would be over the counter if I read it right.
    It would be sold right next to the condoms etc…….
    Which then leads to if its a contraceptive and other forms are already available OTC why not this?
    Again, at that age – if they are going to have sex – a condom would be far better to prevent STD spread.


  • beth says:

    I would hardly call my comments bashing you, bashing society at that time yes, and it seems to me anyway that you were okay, based on your comments anyway, with a school denying the rights of a woman to graduate h.s. just because she made a mistake and got pregnant, with no mention of a similar stance to the other baby maker. Why wasn’t he a pariah?

  • SurfCityTom says:

    I did not say that. I look back at some of the earlier posts.

    Below a certain age, the Parents should be involved in the decision making process. I may be wrong, and I am certain the SCT bashers will jump on it, but don’t physicians require parental approval for the issuance of birth control pills for those below a certain age?

  • Vog46 says:

    (This will probably be a repeat post)

    If you feel the government shouldn’t be in the pregnancy prevention business then contraceptive availability should be to everyone, regardless of age?
    I can agree with that.


  • Vog46 says:

    Most birth control does have age limitations to it.
    Yes a Doc needs parental permission to prescribe the Pill for teens. This is done to insure the patient is prescribed the right thing and in the right dose. If one pill is creating problems other brands can, and will be tried.
    For mechanical devices IUD’s – the Doc needs parental permission for surgical intervention.
    For low cost prevention condoms are available OTC – as apparently this morning after pill will be.
    When we asked store clerks to start checking IDs for Cigs, and alcohol the tore clerks let many kids go.
    Are we now going to create another state agency to perform sting operations that arrest store clerks for selling the morning after pill to under aged kids?

    AS much as I hate to say this – If a kid doesn’t have the “moral fortitude” to say “NO” then the next best thing is to prevent life altering changes for both parties.


  • Vog46 says:

    There are several differences.
    Goolsby’s legislation was to coerce a woman into not having an abortion.
    The morning after pill is an emergency CONTRACEPTIVE not a medially induced abortion pill.
    This WILL, in fact, stop people from having to suckle on the Medicaid nipple as you so eloquently put it in another post.

    The real tragedy here is not abortion – it is the ease in which we allow morality to slip without consequence. I’m aghast at our lack of morality and can’t fathom the thought of being sexually active at 12 to 15 years of age. Then again I din’t watch Teen Mom, or porn on the internet back then. It would have looked horrible on a black and white TV anyway. (Two tuning knobs folks – VHF/UHF, no remote).
    Yes the installation of morality into the mindset of our children starts at home – but gets impacted by things outside the home for which we have no control over.
    I am against abortion but I am also against legislating it. It is purely a woman’s or a couples choice. If they are morally corrupt enough to kill an unborn child I can shun them but I am not naive either. My opinion is based upon the religious influence of my upbringing – instilled by my parents while they were instilling the sense of morality into me. Because of that religious influence I an against legislating this for anyone else, hence my feelings that Goolsby needs a vaginal wand stuck in him.
    But as far as an emergency contraceptive goes? Given the morality (or lack thereof) of the times I would hope that a girl would have the sense to do this but I would more so HOPE that the boy had the sense to use a condom instead, as it provides disease protection as well as pregnancy prevention.


  • SurfCityTom says:

    afraid I disagree with you on one point.

    Just as the state, through Thom, has no business getting into abortions; the Feds, through a Judge or the FDA, has no business getting into pregnancy prevention.

    There are certain areas where government on any level should stay home.

  • Vog46 says:

    But Cleve is well. Heard from him at Christmas
    He attempted to run a forum of his own but it never took off as he hoped it would……..


  • Ex - Liberal says:

    Are you Cleve reborn ?

  • SurfCityTom says:

    15 years of age? That’s a child. If the person she is interacting with is 18 or older, they should be facing statutory rape charges.

    15? Do they understand the pill does not protect against any of the STD or HIV issues?

    Another reason our society is heading down the commode. No sense of morality. And this has nothing to do with beating the Bible.

    Head over to some of the third world countries. They would stone the young lady and the young man if they could identify him. That’s assuming her Father does not take immediate action.

  • Challengetheworld says:


    Travel to Africa, I was there a little bit ago. They hand out Condoms by the truckload because of HIV and unplanned pregnancies. Its not society’s responsibility to enforce morality, its the parents. If someone’s child is in a situation that would require the use of this pill its the parents who should be wondering where they went wrong…not the government, society or any other form of forced religious tolerance.

  • Guestomfg says:

    Obviously you didn’t have sex when you were 15, but guess what? Kids do it. Kids have always done it. Society is heading down the commode? Since?

  • Vog46 says:

    If that girl did the interacting to begin with then showed a presence of mind (questionable I know) to pursue this avenue isn’t it better than the potential consequences?

    Or are you saying that condoms because they also protect against sexually transmitted diseases are better? So you can be immoral so long as you use YOUR preferred birth control methods?

    I sense, and share, your frustration and I worry constantly about my grand children and what they face from a morals standpoint. I have learned from talking to my grand daughter that using generalities is far better for me (as opposed to Grandma who can get into specific sexual acts so long as I am not around). I am flabbergasted to learn that several of her middle school classmates are/were pregnant and that sexual experimenting has been routinely done by that 12 to 14/15 year old age group. She finds it repulsive (for now). That will not last however. I am encouraged by her sense of “self” in that she thinks about HER future plans – high school, college, engineering, NC STATE. She thinks of boys a secondary benefit for her social life and relegate them to that secondary role.
    But clearly I am stunned and shared that with her. She did admit that her generation has been bombarded with “sex” in blatant and more subliminal ways through music, movies, clothing etc and that it was hard to maintain a sense of morality given that onslaught of audio and visual sexuality. She found it easier to think of herself and her future – and THAT allows her to subliminally exert her own sense of morality into her life, without appearing to be prudish to her male friends.
    I jokingly said well if you found a guy who was thinking like you – future, engineering, NC state would that make you think about loosening your morals? She said no, it would make him more palatable as a potential boyfriend but that’s it.
    I’m still scared for her and birth control is being discussed by my female dominated family – but her aunts (my daughters) are brutally honest in their discussions with her – which I am grateful for.
    This is a very tough subject and peer pressure is enormous.
    I am frankly at a loss for words on this aspect of our society


  • Guest3130 says:

    BRAVO, sensible post, thanks.

  • Guesty7 says:

    I was in high school not that long ago and it’s not 18 year olds taking advantage of 15 year olds, its 15 year olds having sex with 15 year olds and so on. Regardless of the education and materials out there, some kids are just going to have sex. Its the “that won’t happen to me” mentality on pregnancy and STDs that is the problem. Providing them with forms of birth control and education on the diseases will be more effective than pamphlets on abstinence. And don’t say that will make more kids have sex, cause it wont…it will just provide the ones who are with a way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and ultimately abortions and stories of babies in trash cans. Wake up folks!

  • Guest2020 says:

    People have always committed murder. Shall we quit prosecuting since people are going to do it anyway?

  • SurfCityTom says:

    so I guess in your world that is okay.

    Teen age pregnancy is apparently much more acceptable than in my youth.

    I attended a high school with a senior class of about 400. We had 1 single female member of our class who became with child. She was a pariah. No wearing the cap and gown. No walking down the aisle to receive her diploma. And I attended a public school; so this was not some religious over-reaction.

    Morality and knowing right from wrong began at the household. There were certain expectations held out for us to achieve by our parents or gaurdians.

    Sadly, today, that does not exist to the degree it should. Were it, we would not see television trash such as Teen Mom. Look at that witless wonder from Oak Island. Great role model for the youngster she is responsible for. Although from what one reads, she shifted that burden onto her Mother.

  • Guestomfg says:

    Didnt say it was OK, its disturbing. None of my children have had children out of wedlock nor under 25. BUT I would rather have this drug available than a bunch more 15 year olds having unwanted welfare sucking babies.

  • SurfCityTom says:

    in your final statement. But what happens when the teen can not afford the pill. Does Medicaid and Social Services step in and pick up the tab?

    There are too many sucking on the Medicaid nipple. Where should the funds be spent?

    Will this be considered a necessary item under Obamacare which the taxpayers will be picking up under Medicaid?

    Tough decisions have to be made?

  • SurfCityTom says:

    been over there.

    Look at my post; set aside your personal feelings; read dispationately.

    I noted they stone underage participants or even behead those acused of adultery.

    And I agree; parents should be the backbone of morality.

    Unfortunately, many are not.

  • Guest2020 says:

    Can we trust a teenager to take the precautions as advised when taking this pill? According to the Mayo Clinic, it is necessary to use two forms of birth control after taking this pill. If a teenager cannot be responsible enough to use one form of birth control, how can they be counted on to use two? How likely is a teenager to make sure that they are not taking any medications that interact with this pill? Are they going to bother to find out that caffeine increases the likelihood of side effects?

    I have also looked into the side effects of this pill and it really should not be allowed over-the-counter. What other otc meds can cause ovarian cysts and abnormal pap smears? It can cause angioedema, which can cause your throat to close up on you.

    This type of medication really should only be used under a doctor’s supervision and for minors, it should be with the parent’s knowledge if not consent.

  • beth says:

    Surfcity Tom, and what of the young man, the other baby maker, was he treated as a pariah? Was he disallowed the opportunity to graduate with his class? What does graduating H.S. have to do with having a baby? If you make the grade you should be allowed to graduate with your class, simple as that.

    I don’t know how old you are, but I imagine you are probably my mom’s age. She too grew up in a similar age and became pregnant out of wedlock. It was a year out of H.S., but same scenario with the one wearing the mark of “visible sin” made to feel like crap. Back then women were encouraged to marry to save the “family name.” As the resulting child of that age, I am here to tell you two wrongs don’t make a right. The offending women of your time wearing the mark of “visible sin” would have been better served to have been encouraged along in their studies, that means completing H.S., walking with their graduating class, and being given the support to continue their education to break the cycle of bad choices and possibly even worse marriages and poverty. Because despite all the studies, marriage doesn’t save a woman from poverty! Not when one is doing all the carrying of responsibility, working, and the other is being the polar opposite

    Not saying today’s society has it any better or more right (quite the opposite), but your generation had it wrong too, though you will never admit it.

    Also, I am kind of curious, can you please kindly explain to me how a “single female member of your class became with child”? I don’t think test tube babies existed back then.

    ‘I attended a high school with a senior class of about 400. We had 1 single female member of our class who became with child. She was a pariah. No wearing the cap and gown. No walking down the aisle to receive her diploma. And I attended a public school; so this was not some religious over-reaction.

    Morality and knowing right from wrong began at the household. There were certain expectations held out for us to achieve by our parents or gaurdia’

  • SurfCityTom says:

    right on the head. Your last 2 sentences make it very clear morality and knowing right from wrong begins at the home. Parents should set high expectations for their children.

    So, what is your point in bashing me?

    The young lady who became with child, and the Father, did in fact marry. They started a succesful business. Last time I was home, they were still together.

    Whether you, and all of the SCTom bashers like it or not, our Country still supports freedom of speech. Different opinions abound.

    You have 1 of 2 choices. Disagree in a civil manner with each side presenting its opinion and whatever facts may be available. OR, resort to personality sneers and insults.

    Far too many resort to the latter. And, I would bet many support or believe in the ACLU and freedom of speech. As long as it is in agreement with their mind set.

    I applaud for not debasing yourself in that latter manner.

    What also amazes me is the apparent turn in thinking.

    Just a few weeks ago, Senator Thom Ghoolsby introduced a bill which had some connection with abortions. If I recall correctly, he was chastized roundly; there were references on this website to “wands” and his intrusion into a woman’s private parts.

    How does that differ from a Federal Agency now saying its okay for children as young as 15 to be allowed to purchase this pill?

Leave a Reply