3 ms·

There are non hormonal options out there like IUDs (and condoms) that may be a better option though. Speaking as a parent, I would rather have my kids come tal

There are non hormonal options out there like IUDs (and condoms) that may be a better option though. Speaking as a parent, I would rather have my kids come talk to me /my wife about this stuff and work with us and a doctor to figure out what's best for them long term. I recognize not every kid has that kind of relationship with their parents and would benefit from purchasing it directly.

odyssey7 3y ago
As much as this is coming from a good place with good intentions, some things are human rights[1] that parents shouldn’t be able to withhold. [1] https://theweek.com/articles/470330/birth-control-human-right https://theweek.com/articles/470330/birth-control-human-righ...
- giantg2 3y ago
  That doesn't contradict what the parent is saying. Having access to non-hormonal options still fulfills the UN stance.
- nsxwolf 3y ago
  This being a "human right" seems like a matter of opinion.
- Levitz 3y ago
  Your article talks about an annual report, then links another article written 3 years before the one you link, said article doesn't link to the report. So I search for the report itself: https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/AR%202012%20EN-Final.pdf https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/AR%202012%... And the claim is nowhere near the one you are making. What the UNFPA (who can't even declare anything a human right, by the way) is saying is: >Family planning is anchored in respect for human rights, women’s empowerment, and social justice and quality. And >In October, UNFPA published its annual The State of World Population report, which made the case that family planning is a basic human right that unlocks unprecedented rewards for women in terms of health, economic power and gender equality. Putting medical barriers to access the pill is by no means whatsoever a violation of human rights.
runako 3y ago
> There are non hormonal options out there like IUDs (and condoms) that may be a better option though. Whether one agrees or disagrees with this, the argument is not strong enough to warrant a prescription requirement. (Also and separately: human bodies are complex. If you talk to a few women you might discover that IUDs are not universally tolerated and condoms are not an acceptable substitute for a variety of reasons. There are good reasons many women choose to take oral contraceptives, even though they have a daily use requirement.) This isn't just about kids, it's also about the inconvenience and added cost (to pay for the doctor visits) placed on all women who use oral contraceptives. I'm not sure how it relates at all to this announcement.
- angmarsbane 3y ago
  Attempting to get an IUD installed was the most physically painful experience in my life to date.
  - cogman10 3y ago
    IUDs don't have great track records for safety. [1] The pill is simply one of the safest options on the market. It's not perfect, but it's generally super well tolerated. [1] https://www.consumersafety.org/medical-device-lawsuits/mirena/ https://www.consumersafety.org/medical-device-lawsuits/miren...

odyssey7 3y ago

As much as this is coming from a good place with good intentions, some things are human rights[1] that parents shouldn’t be able to withhold. [1] https://theweek.com/articles/470330/birth-control-human-right https://theweek.com/articles/470330/birth-control-human-righ...

giantg2 3y ago
That doesn't contradict what the parent is saying. Having access to non-hormonal options still fulfills the UN stance.
nsxwolf 3y ago
This being a "human right" seems like a matter of opinion.
Levitz 3y ago
Your article talks about an annual report, then links another article written 3 years before the one you link, said article doesn't link to the report. So I search for the report itself: https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/AR%202012%20EN-Final.pdf https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/AR%202012%... And the claim is nowhere near the one you are making. What the UNFPA (who can't even declare anything a human right, by the way) is saying is: >Family planning is anchored in respect for human rights, women’s empowerment, and social justice and quality. And >In October, UNFPA published its annual The State of World Population report, which made the case that family planning is a basic human right that unlocks unprecedented rewards for women in terms of health, economic power and gender equality. Putting medical barriers to access the pill is by no means whatsoever a violation of human rights.

runako 3y ago

> There are non hormonal options out there like IUDs (and condoms) that may be a better option though. Whether one agrees or disagrees with this, the argument is not strong enough to warrant a prescription requirement. (Also and separately: human bodies are complex. If you talk to a few women you might discover that IUDs are not universally tolerated and condoms are not an acceptable substitute for a variety of reasons. There are good reasons many women choose to take oral contraceptives, even though they have a daily use requirement.) This isn't just about kids, it's also about the inconvenience and added cost (to pay for the doctor visits) placed on all women who use oral contraceptives. I'm not sure how it relates at all to this announcement.

angmarsbane 3y ago
Attempting to get an IUD installed was the most physically painful experience in my life to date.
- cogman10 3y ago
  IUDs don't have great track records for safety. [1] The pill is simply one of the safest options on the market. It's not perfect, but it's generally super well tolerated. [1] https://www.consumersafety.org/medical-device-lawsuits/mirena/ https://www.consumersafety.org/medical-device-lawsuits/miren...