“The Pill”

The morning after pill, commonly known as Plan B, was recently approved by the FDA to allow the over-the-counter prescription for adolescent girls under the age of 17. Because of the alarming rate of teenage pregnancies in the country, the FDA made this decision with the intent of the drug being more readily available for a more targeted age group. However, Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, saw this as an extreme ethical issue and overturned the decision made by the FDA.

In the December 21st (2011) issue of Nature, the author discusses this controversy in more detail. The author argues that “President Obama’s stance on an emergency contraceptive betrays his promised principles of scientific integrity and sets a troubling precedent for political interference in inconvenient science.” The author in a contrasting article, “Should the Morning After Pill be Available to All Ages” discusses this article and presents a slightly different approach by presenting both sides of the argument, and not necessarily choosing a side. Both articles make strong claims about the morning after pill controversy while expressing their opinions. However, one article looks more at the political aspect of the article and the other article demonstrates the ethical issues.

The Nature article explains that the President gathered a variety of scientists together and assured them of scientific integrity that directed agency heads not to “meddle in the decisions of their scientific staff.” Obama pledged that scientists would be able to complete their jobs free of manipulation and coercion, and that the agency heads would keep an open mind and listen to what they said even when it would be “inconvenient”. This became null in void when Obama defended Kathleen Sebelius to override the approval of the contraceptive pill approved by the FDA (The Morning After). The author claims that many doctors have determined that the pill is safe and effective for girls under the age of 17 and that these girls could use the pill without the help of a physician. Even the FDA’s commissioner expressed the non-existence of ethical issues associated with the administering of the drug. “‘There is adequate and reasonable, well-supported, and science-based evidence that Plan B One-Step is safe and effective and should be approved for nonprescription use for all females of child-bearing potential.’”  Based off of the supporting evidence that the author has given, he concludes that because Obama has deviated from his word, he is infuriated. He feels as though Obama is not well versed/informed in the subject matter, that in order to support his decision to interfere within the scientific world he used a paternalist argument, and lastly, the President's  jettisoning of the evidence on the contraceptive’s safety, effectiveness, and their ability to comprehend the labeling (The Morning After). The article happens to express the author’s sentiments toward politics interfering with scientific decisions (The Morning After).

In “Should the ‘Morning After’ Pill Be Available to All Ages?” elaborates upon and demonstrates the arguments of a recent editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine (Dalrymple). The author argues that ten and eleven year olds having access to the pill seems “callous and unfeeling” but on the other hand, it also seems callous and unfeeling to force them to go through with abortion air pregnancy because of delayed access to the pill. The editorial sates that the drug is safe, but a physician points out that there hasn’t been many studies and evidence on the effect the drug may have on the targeted age group. The editorial is also worried that making the drug available to adolescents under 17 will penalize the poorest groups because of their lack of documentation proving their age. One doctor in France said that despite the easy access to the pill, there needs to be a more comprehensive strategy in the area of preventive care (Dalrymple). A doctor from Italy objected to the idea of preventive care because to him, pregnancy is not a disease. It is a natural happening.

It is important to see that the supplying of birth control to an adolescent group raises serious ethical issues. Both articles raised these issues, and supplied its audience with important and pertinent information about this issue. However, the Nature article should have focused more on the ethical issue that results from the controversy more so than on the politics. The President had to exercise his power based on what he thought was right for the country. Sometimes, this involves slight deviations from the platform. I liked that the contrasting article not only presented the ethical claims but also was in favor of both sides.

Works Cited

"The Morning After." Nature. Nature Editorial, 22 12 2011. Web. <http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v480/n7378/full/480413a.html>.

Dalrymple, Theodore. "Should the Morning After Pill Be Available to All Ages?." PJ Media. Health, HealthCare, Politics, Science, & Technology, US News, 26 01 20121. Web. <http://pjmedia.com>.