-
June 20, 2013
Local and National reactions regarding decision to lift age limits on purchase of over-the-counter emergency contraceptives
From Ray Delisle, spokesman, Diocese of Worcester
"It is deeply disturbing that a federal judge is choosing to change the restriction on access to contraception by minors. Society calls them minors for a reason. Minors are not in a position to be making life-altering decisions on their own. Society demands this regarding driving, alcohol, cigarettes, and firearms. To allow over-the-counter access to the so-called “morning-after pill” further opens the door for minors to engage in behaviors that are not for their good and to which parents object. Even the law does not condone sexual activity involving a minor; this disturbing ruling facilitates abuse by adults who would try to cover up a criminal act. The physical consequences of these potent hormones are destructive to women’s health, and could potentially be even more so in minors, as evidenced by the FDA’s initial restrictions."
From Deirdre McQuaide, spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Secretariat for Pro Life Activities
“A federal district judge in New York has ordered the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to lift all age limits on over-the-counter access to the so-called “emergency contraceptive” drug Plan B and its generic versions.
“Plan B is a large dose of a powerful hormonal drug (levonorgestrel) that is available only by prescription when used in smaller doses for contraception. The court has acted irresponsibly by making this powerful drug available without a prescription to minor children.
“Plan B does not prevent or treat any disease, but makes young adolescent girls more available to sexual predators. The court’s action undermines parents’ ability to protect their daughters from such exploitation and from the adverse effects of the drug itself.
“Many studies have shown that wider access to “emergency contraception” among young people does not reduce pregnancy or abortion rates, but can contribute to higher rates of sexually transmitted disease. No public health consideration justifies the unregulated distribution of such drugs to children. This ruling should be appealed and overturned.”
#####