(09-26-2012 04:28 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:This is so typical of every argument I have with supposed liberals. People have rights WHICH YOU CANNOT TAKE AWAY FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER WITHOUT DUE PROCESS!! Sending a letter home is NOT due process. What about this is not clear?

And how many times have I made it clear that the teenagers themselves have rights, similar to yours and mine, and those include not being forced to notify their parents of contraceptive usage per Carey v. Population Services International. This is simply a more effective manner to allow all teenagers the rights that those whose parents take an active role in their life do.

I'm not sure that decision is as relevant here. That decision stated, among other things, that it's unconstitutional to forbid the sale of contraceptives to minors. That's not the same as saying that minors have the right to purchase/acquire ALL contraceptives. Further, the decision specifically references non-medical contraceptives. I think here, and where it really hinges for me, is the dispensing of a prescription drug. And I don't think the Carey v. Population Services International decision gives teenagers the right to obtain prescription drugs/contraceptives without parental consent.

Native Georgian-

I appreciate some of your thought patterns above. I think you are processing information and questioning why someone said what they did versus what they said. Or in this case why they omitted something. Carter is a fascinating study to me. He had an integral part in bringing Egypt and Isreal to the peace table. (Me thinks we are going to see how important that really was) He had a great message in conservation. (Always underplayed) We scoffed at his warnings on over dependence of Middle East oil.


History will be kinder to Carter than to W. You watch.

(09-26-2012 05:53 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 04:28 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:This is so typical of every argument I have with supposed liberals. People have rights WHICH YOU CANNOT TAKE AWAY FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER WITHOUT DUE PROCESS!! Sending a letter home is NOT due process. What about this is not clear?

And how many times have I made it clear that the teenagers themselves have rights, similar to yours and mine, and those include not being forced to notify their parents of contraceptive usage per Carey v. Population Services International. This is simply a more effective manner to allow all teenagers the rights that those whose parents take an active role in their life do.

I'm not sure that decision is as relevant here. That decision stated, among other things, that it's unconstitutional to forbid the sale of contraceptives to minors. That's not the same as saying that minors have the right to purchase/acquire ALL contraceptives. Further, the decision specifically references non-medical contraceptives. I think here, and where it really hinges for me, is the dispensing of a prescription drug. And I don't think the Carey v. Population Services International decision gives teenagers the right to obtain prescription drugs/contraceptives without parental consent.

It's not a prescription drug for anyone other than those under 17 years old (it is not a dangerous medication), and I wasn't quoting Carey to say that it guarantees them the right to contraceptives, I was using it to prove that parental consent is indisputably not a right in regards to contraception, legally speaking. So all of this hee-hawing about their sacred rights being trampled upon aren't valid in the least.

Quote:As I suggested... when you register, you sign the form. Really simple.

But in an emergency... like the kid shows up day one and needs the pill and the parents didn't register them, yes... There already are administrators, social workers AND school police (including truant officers) on salary in every district whose job it is to get the proper paperwork on file for children. Do you REALLY see this as a major problem? Seriously?

Again, you keep assuming every school is a good school in suburbia full of upper-middle class students with administrators on staff to handle stuff like this at all times. Schools don't have money to hire the teachers they need right now, and you want to insist they have this option available to prevent any kids from getting the contraception they legally are allowed to get without your consent. You're arguing for parental consent, when that is illegal.

Do you REALLY see this as logical? Seriously?

Quote: Opting in or out, unless you are having to do it at the time of drug delivery has nothing to do with effectiveness... so to the point... so It's NOT morally or fiscally different.

No, under your example it would at the very, very least delay the drug delivery by a few hours, lowering it's effectiveness. And yes, it's also fiscally different. Unless of course, you think that teachers/truant officers/administrators/judges/etc all work for free?

Quote:Wow.

That case has nothing to do with oral medicine, NOR parental consent.

You can't just make up rights for kids. Show me where a child has the right to seek medical services without parental notification/consent? Buying a rubber is not a medical service. Contraception means stopping it before it happens, not after.

It absolutely applies to all contraceptives, including birth control and Plan B. Hence, why state health clinics can legally give Plan B to minors under the age of 17, and are legally not allowed to notify the parents. Teenagers have the right to due process, it's limited, but not in this case. You don't believe me?

Quote:It's not. Taking away parental rights without due process is.

All you have to do is make the form part of the same form you sign when you allow them to give your child aspirin or benadryl... or when you give them your insurance information in case they get hurt on school grounds so they can go to a hospital.

Seriously... WHY are you so afraid of opt in?

Here are the choices...
1) the parent registers the child. They either opt in, or they don't. Either way, it's an intentional act by the responsible parent

2) the parent DOESN"T register the child. The School district and their staff make decisions on behalf of the parents, who have now DEMONSTRATED a lack of parental interest. Due process.

People like you hate the slippery slope argument... but this isn't a slope at all. You are denying a parent a right that is clear. You are claiming a right of a minor that doesn't exist. Like it or not. Agree with it or not. The Morning after pill is a medical decision, and medical decisions are not made by minors.

But that's just it, you don't have a right to know. Not only do you not have a right to know, clinics are legally not allowed to tell you about your childs reproductive issues without their consent. You're claiming rights you simply do not have.

(09-26-2012 07:20 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  It's not a prescription drug for anyone other than those under 17 years old..

Do you know *WHY* some meds are like that? ok if over 17 not ok if under. Or dangerous for teens but not for adults?

Kids are not "little adults". If something like plan B is prescription for adolecents there is a damn good reason for it.

(09-26-2012 07:31 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 07:20 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  It's not a prescription drug for anyone other than those under 17 years old..

Do you know *WHY* some meds are like that? ok if over 17 not ok if under. Or dangerous for teens but not for adults?

Kids are not "little adults". If something like plan B is prescription for adolecents there is a damn good reason for it.

I likely know far more about this than you, yes, and this is not an example of a dangerous drug which reacts differently with 14 year olds than with 18 year olds, this is an example of politics worming their way into medical issues. And the irony of you questioning the safety of hormone-based drugs to prevent pregnancy, when the hormone in question is the synthetic form of the one produced continually during pregnancy isn't lost to me.

Once a teen has begun menstruating, their body can handle this medication as well as an adult, physiologically speaking. And again, what you're saying completely negates the main reason this is irrelevant; Plan B isn't something a minor takes for a headache or cold, it's to prevent either pregnancy or an abortion. Both of those are indispubtably and unequivically far more dangerous to the teen than a double dose of the progestogen found in the average birth control pill.

(09-26-2012 07:42 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 07:31 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 07:20 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  It's not a prescription drug for anyone other than those under 17 years old..

Do you know *WHY* some meds are like that? ok if over 17 not ok if under. Or dangerous for teens but not for adults?

Kids are not "little adults". If something like plan B is prescription for adolecents there is a damn good reason for it.

I likely know far more about this than you, yes, and this is not an example of a dangerous drug which reacts differently with 14 year olds than with 18 year olds, this is an example of politics worming their way into medical issues. And the irony of you questioning the safety of hormone-based drugs to prevent pregnancy, when the hormone in question is the synthetic form of the one produced continually during pregnancy isn't lost to me.

Once a teen has begun menstruating, their body can handle this medication as well as an adult, physiologically speaking. And again, what you're saying completely negates the main reason this is irrelevant; Plan B isn't something a minor takes for a headache or cold, it's to prevent either pregnancy or an abortion. Both of those are indispubtably and unequivically far more dangerous to the teen than a double dose of the progestogen found in the average birth control pill.

Oh you know more about everything than everyone UCF, thats one of youre more endearing traits... If I need parenting advice I go to the local 25 year old without kids!

Tell me, are school nurses qualified or certified to know drug interactions?

Why is society accepting teenage promiscuity?

(09-26-2012 07:20 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  It's not a prescription drug for anyone other than those under 17 years old (it is not a dangerous medication), and I wasn't quoting Carey to say that it guarantees them the right to contraceptives, I was using it to prove that parental consent is indisputably not a right in regards to contraception, legally speaking. So all of this hee-hawing about their sacred rights being trampled upon aren't valid in the least.

Abortion, including the morning after pill is not contraception.... this it is not hee-hawing. Condoms are not prescription for anyone. Give out all the free condoms you want without my permission. I dont' know about YOUR schools, but MY school can't give benadryl, aspirin or pepto without consent. Those aren't prescription, but they are medical.

Quote:

Quote:As I suggested... when you register, you sign the form. Really simple.

Again, you keep assuming every school is a good school in suburbia full of upper-middle class students with administrators on staff to handle stuff like this at all times. Schools don't have money to hire the teachers they need right now, and you want to insist they have this option available to prevent any kids from getting the contraception they legally are allowed to get without your consent. You're arguing for parental consent, when that is illegal.

Do you REALLY see this as logical? Seriously?

are you REALLY arguing that urban schools don't have registration papers on their students or that an extra check box on them would be cost prohibitive? You have plenty of money to fund and deliver the pills, not to mention the potential legal liability should someone suffer a side-effect, AND the money to send a letter and process the opt-outs... but no money for an opt in? I'm calling BS. Surely you didn't think about that before you wrote it.

Quote:

Quote: Opting in or out, unless you are having to do it at the time of drug delivery has nothing to do with effectiveness... so to the point... so It's NOT morally or fiscally different.

No, under your example it would at the very, very least delay the drug delivery by a few hours, lowering it's effectiveness. And yes, it's also fiscally different. Unless of course, you think that teachers/truant officers/administrators/judges/etc all work for free?

They're already on staff, and already following up on missing paperwork... not to mention the forms for those who opted out... I mean you ARE processing those, right?? and the example I gave was someone needing the morning after pill the morning they registered for school... who are registering without parental supervision. You're reaching.

Quote:

Quote:Wow.

That case has nothing to do with oral medicine, NOR parental consent.

You can't just make up rights for kids. Show me where a child has the right to seek medical services without parental notification/consent? Buying a rubber is not a medical service. Contraception means stopping it before it happens, not after.

It absolutely applies to all contraceptives, including birth control and Plan B. Hence, why state health clinics can legally give Plan B to minors under the age of 17, and are legally not allowed to notify the parents. Teenagers have the right to due process, it's limited, but not in this case. You don't believe me?

The case has to do with advertising. It rejected the claim that minors could see the ad, and that was a violation, not that they were entitled to buy what was being sold.

14 of 50 states allow what you describe. in 36 states, GUESS WHAT?? it says a judge can waive the requirement. If it is so easy, then why does the school need to be involved?

Quote:But that's just it, you don't have a right to know. Not only do you not have a right to know, clinics are legally not allowed to tell you about your childs reproductive issues without their consent. You're claiming rights you simply do not have.

Wrong again. How did what you describe become law in 14 states? By Due Process.

It IS a Constitutional right that has been limited by the writing and passing of a law to limit that right. It is NOT an inherent right of a child. If it were, there would be no need for a policy about it. No need for a prescription.

Quote:Oh you know more about everything than everyone UCF, thats one of youre more endearing traits... If I need parenting advice I go to the local 25 year old without kids!

I returned to school to become a physicians assistant, so I don't think the statement 'I probably do know more than you about this' is out of line. I'm far from an expert of course, but I'm still far more knowledgeable about this sort of stuff than the average person.
But don't take my word for it -

Per the Office of Population Research at Princeton University

Quote:Many leading medical associations, including the Society for Adolescent Medicine and the American Academy of Pediatrics, have criticized the FDA age limit for making it harder for teens in the U.S. to prevent pregnancy. For these reasons, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists – the leading professional association of doctors who specialize in women’s health – recommends getting emergency contraceptive pills before they are needed.

Quote:Tell me, are school nurses qualified or certified to know drug interactions?

Absolutely, especially since these aren't just 'school nurses', they're specially trained nurses which are the same which work in the health clinics throughout the state already, and who focus on reproductive issues. I'd trust nurses in that position more than a general practitioner and certainly more than a lot of specialist MDs who haven't focused on those issues since residency.

I hate to break it to ya'll......I know for a FACT that in North Carolina your 14 year old daughter can go to your local Heath Department and receive birth control, STD screening .and yes...plan B without your consent and totally confidential. If you asked them why your daughter was seen at the Health Department?..They would not tell you. They do give the applicant a physical and do patient history on them.

I am told by a very knowledgeable person who is a Health Director of my local Heath Department..and is my spouse...that included in Title 10..which is a Federal program that includes prenatal and "family planning" ... Plan B would be included. So...Every Health Department in America already can take your 14 year old(and younger) daughter as a patient and there is nothing you can do about it.

I did see tonight the report on NBC about this and it stated that the NYC Health Department was running this program. So..This looks to be the HC trying to make itself more accessible to the daughters of NYC parents and doing as ALL bureaucracies do...extending the scope of their programs and growing their bureaucracy.

Just food for thought on the subject...

Hambone, Plan B is not an abortion.It's the difference between removing an implanted and fertilized egg from the uterus, and not allowing fertilization to occur. All scientific literature points to the latter conclusion.

Carey v. etc, did in fact rule that laws limiting the ability for minors to receive contraception were an infringement of their due process - per THE CASE FINDING ITSELF

Quote:MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, joined by MR. JUSTICE STEWART, MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL, and MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, concluded in Part IV that the provision prohibiting distribution of contraceptives to persons under 16, as applied to nonprescription contraceptives, cannot be justified as a permissible regulation of minors' morality in furtherance of the State's policy against promiscuous sexual intercourse among the young. Pp. 691-699.

(a) The right to privacy in connection with decisions affecting procreation extends to minors as well as to adults, and since a State may not impose a blanket prohibition, or even a blanket requirement of parental consent, on the choice of a minor to terminate her pregnancy, Planned Parenthood of Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, the constitutionality of a blanket prohibition of the distribution of contraceptives to minors is a fortiori foreclosed. Pp. 693-694.

You need to accept these two facts or I'm done discussing this topic with you because your arguments are centered completely on them, and are therefore irrelevant to the discussion.

(09-26-2012 07:59 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I hate to break it to ya'll......I know for a FACT that in North Carolina your 14 year old daughter can go to your local Heath Department and receive birth control, STD screening .and yes...plan B without your consent and totally confidential. If you asked them why your daughter was seen at the Health Department?..They would not tell you. They do give the applicant a physical and do patient history on them.

I am told by a very knowledgeable person who is a Health Director of my local Heath Department..and is my spouse...that included in Title 10..which is a Federal program that includes prenatal and "family planning" ... Plan B would be included. So...Every Health Department in America already can take your 14 year old(and younger) daughter as a patient and there is nothing you can do about it.

I did see tonight the report on NBC about this and it stated that the NYC Health Department was running this program. So..This looks to be the HC trying to make itself more accessible to the daughters of NYC parents and doing as ALL bureaucracies do...extending the scope of their programs and growing their bureaucracy.

Just food for thought on the subject...

I honestly love the idea, make contraceptives as available as possible and limit teen pregnancy, and do so in the most effective way possible; cutting out the biggest issue for teens, getting to and from the clinics.

(09-26-2012 07:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Absolutely, especially since these aren't just 'school nurses', they're specially trained nurses which are the same which work in the health clinics throughout the state already, and who focus on reproductive issues. I'd trust nurses in that position more than a general practitioner and certainly more than a lot of specialist MDs who haven't focused on those issues since residency.

UCF you're dead wrong here. I come from a family of medical professionals and among them are two nurses and neither of them would ever assume they know not to make that lead.

I trust nurses 100% and I know doctors ar enot worth their spit without them but at the same time if I have to get a drug and I'm worried about interactions I go i this order

1) Pharmacist
2) Doctors
3) Nurses

Nurses can not prescribe medications for a reason!

(09-26-2012 08:48 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 07:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Absolutely, especially since these aren't just 'school nurses', they're specially trained nurses which are the same which work in the health clinics throughout the state already, and who focus on reproductive issues. I'd trust nurses in that position more than a general practitioner and certainly more than a lot of specialist MDs who haven't focused on those issues since residency.

UCF you're dead wrong here. I come from a family of medical professionals and among them are two nurses and neither of them would ever assume they know not to make that lead.

I trust nurses 100% and I know doctors ar enot worth their spit without them but at the same time if I have to get a drug and I'm worried about interactions I go i this order

1) Pharmacist
2) Doctors
3) Nurses

Nurses can not prescribe medications for a reason!

I agree with this. I'm a nurse and although sometimes I wish I had the ability to prescribe medications, I understand that every drug has significant complications and side effects that are very real possibilities.

(09-26-2012 08:51 PM)homefry20 Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 08:48 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 07:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Absolutely, especially since these aren't just 'school nurses', they're specially trained nurses which are the same which work in the health clinics throughout the state already, and who focus on reproductive issues. I'd trust nurses in that position more than a general practitioner and certainly more than a lot of specialist MDs who haven't focused on those issues since residency.

UCF you're dead wrong here. I come from a family of medical professionals and among them are two nurses and neither of them would ever assume they know not to make that lead.

I trust nurses 100% and I know doctors ar enot worth their spit without them but at the same time if I have to get a drug and I'm worried about interactions I go i this order

1) Pharmacist
2) Doctors
3) Nurses

Nurses can not prescribe medications for a reason!

I agree with this. I'm a nurse and although sometimes I wish I had the ability to prescribe medications, I understand that every drug has significant complications and side effects that are very real possibilities.

You're ignoring the fact that the American Academy of Pediatrics themselves do not agree with a prescription being required for teenage use. Please though, feel free to find evidence to support your claim as I have with mine.

And please don't forget that it isn't the doctors who necessarily get to choose the drugs limitations, especially in concern to reproductive issues, as can be seen from the fact it took petitioning by almost every major medical association to allow Plan B to be sold over the counter to the 17+ population.

And at least we seem to agree on the strengths and under appreciation of pharmicists in our current medical community. The majority are glorified fast-food pill sorters, despite having doctorates in pharmacology and knowing better than many doctors the chemistry aspect of medicine.

(09-26-2012 09:00 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 08:51 PM)homefry20 Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 08:48 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 07:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Absolutely, especially since these aren't just 'school nurses', they're specially trained nurses which are the same which work in the health clinics throughout the state already, and who focus on reproductive issues. I'd trust nurses in that position more than a general practitioner and certainly more than a lot of specialist MDs who haven't focused on those issues since residency.

UCF you're dead wrong here. I come from a family of medical professionals and among them are two nurses and neither of them would ever assume they know not to make that lead.

I trust nurses 100% and I know doctors ar enot worth their spit without them but at the same time if I have to get a drug and I'm worried about interactions I go i this order

1) Pharmacist
2) Doctors
3) Nurses

Nurses can not prescribe medications for a reason!

I agree with this. I'm a nurse and although sometimes I wish I had the ability to prescribe medications, I understand that every drug has significant complications and side effects that are very real possibilities.

You're ignoring the fact that the American Academy of Pediatrics themselves do not agree with a prescription being required for teenage use. Please though, feel free to find evidence to support your claim as I have with mine.

And that's definitely their prerogative, but what is their stance on a minor buying and taking a drug without parental or MD consent?

I don't think you didn't understood my post, because that's exactly what they are arguing; it should be available over the counter to minors under the age of 17.

(09-26-2012 09:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  I don't think you didn't understood my post, because that's exactly what they are arguing; it should be available over the counter to minors under the age of 17.

How old do you have to be to buy aspirin?

(09-26-2012 09:30 PM)homefry20 Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 09:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  I don't think you didn't understood my post, because that's exactly what they are arguing; it should be available over the counter to minors under the age of 17.

How old do you have to be to buy aspirin?

That isn't relevant to the discussion on Plan B, at all. Stay on topic.