Over-the-Counter: Plan B

by Lindsay Stewart

According to the Guttmacher Institute in New York, almost 3.5 million pregnancies in the United States each year are unintended. In an attempt to change this, the Food and Drug Administration has put forth a plan to offer Plan B (also known as “the morning after pill” or “second chance”) over the counter, claiming it could cut this number in half by 2008.

So what took so long to for a plan to be accepted which would drastically decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies each year? Basically, Plan B is a mega-dose of the same drugs in birth control that, when taken within 72 hours of intercourse, can lower your chances of getting pregnant by almost 89%. The drug was introduced by Barr Laboratories and first approved by the FDA in the early nineties strictly for prescription use.

The initial proposal from Barr did allow Plan B to be distributed over the counter; however, only in 2001 did that actually become a possibility. Under pressure from Democratic senators like Hillary Clinton to push aside politics for the sake of their own scientific integrity, the FDA finally accepted the proposal this past July. Andrew von Eschenbach, nominee for head of the FDA, backed the idea. He, along with Barr Laboritories and the FDA are working together so that, by the end of this year, Plan B will be available without a prescription to anyone over the age of 18 in drugstores all over the United States.

In September, our own President Bush showed a more liberal face as he backed the Eschenbach plan to offer the drug over-the-counter, with the exception that a prescription was needed for underage individuals. Although Bush is adamant that “Plan B ought to have a prescription for minors”, anti-choice groups all over the country are in an uproar over the decision.

Members of the FDA claim that the drug does not abort, but pro-lifers tell a very different story. According to Judie Brown, president of the American League of Life, “based on his apparent willingness to see the Food and Drug Administration authorize the potentially lethal Plan B drug regimen for women over 18, the President is apparently doing anything but protecting innocent human life. It is unfortunate and sad that politics have once again trumped the innocent babies”.

However, the pill, when taken properly, prevents the ovaries from releasing an egg at all. Where the idea of abortion comes is in the chance that the egg has already been released, fertilized, and implanted. In this case, the pill prevents the egg from being implanted at all. Basically, one must subscribe to the idea that life begins before the egg is even rooted in the lining of the uterus – an idea which very few scientists, if any, agree with.

Not only does a chunk of Bush’s political base have a problem with the decision, advocates of the plan claim that the legislation is unfair to those under the age of 18. Annie Tummino, women’s rights activist and lead plaintiff in the suit filed against the FDA to force the organization to issue a decision, maintains that the age restriction is completely arbitrary, pointing out that studies show Plan B has no varying effects on those under the age of 18. As of now, a doctor visit and prescription are still required for anyone under 18 to have access to the pill. Although this appears to be a way to, initially, put some restrictions on the drug, advocates of the plan assert that it should be available to all ages, citing that open access to birth control has never produced an increase in teenage pregnancy.

While this is a major step for women’s rights, Tummino and others are asking for more, demanding that the FDA separate themselves from any political affiliation and focus on science. To them, Bush’s decision, like the FDA’s appears based in politics rather than any real, scientific evidence that age matters. On the other hand, groups like Concerned Women for America have a major problem with offering Plan B over the counter to any age group.

If doctors acknowledge the health risks that accompany birth control and require a prescription for its use, CWA is asking why they would offer Plan B (basically a large dose of the same drugs) without a prescription as well. Many point out the possibility that the drug could become another method of birth control, like condoms or the pill.

Proponents also draw attention to the increase in sexually transmitted diseases amongst the current population of 18 to 25-year-olds in the past decade, and warn the dangers of offering another solution which may prevent pregnancy but doesn’t protect against AIDS. Is this a case of simple ignorance?

Numerous studies have shown that teenagers did not change their sexual behavior when given access to the drug, even without the knowledge of how easily they could get it. Increased access to methods of birth control have, typically, never given rise to increased promiscuity in sexually active women let alone those who practice abstinence. For many, the advantages of offering Plan B over-the-counter drastically outweigh the disadvantages, if they see any at all. Many women understand the importance of birth control as a way to prevent abortions. Making this drug easier to obtain does not offer a second chance for women to continue practicing unsafe sex, rather a way to decrease the number of children born each year into reluctant homes.

With this information, consider this: out of almost 6 million pregnancies each year, 1.3 million of those end up in abortion. Since the early nineties, a pill has been available which would greatly reduce the number of abortions in the United States. Can’t pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike both agree on something?