4 ms·

What she wants to do is her business. If she wants to use an app or a voodoo magician for health I frankly think it is no body's business to tell her otherwise.

by tn13 10y ago

What she wants to do is her business. If she wants to use an app or a voodoo magician for health I frankly think it is no body's business to tell her otherwise. Even third world countries have birth control off the shelf.

cperciva 10y ago
That's the strict Libertarian view, yes. The consensus among medical ethicists, however, is that medical professionals have a duty to avoid allowing patients to come to harm, and that this duty takes priority even over the patient's wishes; wanting to cut your arm off may be your own business, but you won't find a surgeon offering to sell you tools for that purpose.
- jessaustin 10y ago
  You seem here to blur the distinction between "women can't expect physicians or pharmacists to give them birth control with certain side effects" and "women can't get birth control with certain side effects".
- srtjstjsj 10y ago
  The consensus among medical ethicists is that medical professionals have a pretty bad track record of treating womens' health issues. The (over-)medicalization of childbirth, for example, has had a notable impact.
  - zaroth 10y ago
    The medicalization of childbirth isn't doing so bad overall. We did well going from 1 in 100 maternal deaths to 1 in 10,000. Something has gone off the rails however as that rate doubled in the US since then to 2 in 10,000. Similarly for IMR, an impressive drop from 1 in 10 to better than 1 in 100.
- aianus 10y ago
  This attitude is incredibly patronizing and "harm" is very subjective. I feel like having a child is 100x more harmful to me than never having one, but urologists in the US almost unanimously disagree and refuse to perform vasectomies on the childless.
  - intopieces 10y ago
    I thought vasectomies were reversible? If only we could get that gel they have in India.
- tn13 10y ago
  The medical ethicists can apply their ethics on their own self and not on others. A doctor should be free to refuse to treat a patient if it goes against his/her ethics. Giving few men power over other people's health seems evil to me.

by tn13 10y ago

cperciva 10y ago

That's the strict Libertarian view, yes. The consensus among medical ethicists, however, is that medical professionals have a duty to avoid allowing patients to come to harm, and that this duty takes priority even over the patient's wishes; wanting to cut your arm off may be your own business, but you won't find a surgeon offering to sell you tools for that purpose.

jessaustin 10y ago
You seem here to blur the distinction between "women can't expect physicians or pharmacists to give them birth control with certain side effects" and "women can't get birth control with certain side effects".
srtjstjsj 10y ago
The consensus among medical ethicists is that medical professionals have a pretty bad track record of treating womens' health issues. The (over-)medicalization of childbirth, for example, has had a notable impact.
- zaroth 10y ago
  The medicalization of childbirth isn't doing so bad overall. We did well going from 1 in 100 maternal deaths to 1 in 10,000. Something has gone off the rails however as that rate doubled in the US since then to 2 in 10,000. Similarly for IMR, an impressive drop from 1 in 10 to better than 1 in 100.
aianus 10y ago
This attitude is incredibly patronizing and "harm" is very subjective. I feel like having a child is 100x more harmful to me than never having one, but urologists in the US almost unanimously disagree and refuse to perform vasectomies on the childless.
- intopieces 10y ago
  I thought vasectomies were reversible? If only we could get that gel they have in India.
tn13 10y ago
The medical ethicists can apply their ethics on their own self and not on others. A doctor should be free to refuse to treat a patient if it goes against his/her ethics. Giving few men power over other people's health seems evil to me.