The morning after pill dilemma

[badgersprite]

I'm a little confused by the question, OP. The legal age of consent as you describe it isn't there to punish kids for having sex too young; it's not a crime for two underage people to have sex and there are no legal penalties for it. That law exists to protect children from being preyed upon by older people. So, no, she wasn't breaking any laws or doing anything wrong by having sex.

As far as 'informing the parents', doesn't that just make underage kids distrustful of pharmacists and distrustful of seeking medical advice? How many guys would buy condoms if they knew the pharmacist was going to ring up and tell their parents about it? I mean, seriously, I'm twenty, and I still don't want my parents to know a damn thing about my sex life.

I honestly can't even see how this is even an issue or a question that needs to be asked, or even what that question is. I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I just genuinely can't see the supposed dilemma here.

Besides which, as a pharmacist, is it really your job to go around making moral and ethical judgements about other people's lives in the first place? Would you want other pharmacists to be able to do that? I mean, no offence to anyone else here, but if my pharmacist decided to deny me access to medications because his religious beliefs decreed it was wrong, I would be pretty pissed off that someone is letting their personal shit interfere with my legal rights to access treatment and deciding that they know more than my doctor about my body, my life and my health.

So, yes, by enabling someone to make their own decisions about their body - within the bounds of the law and accepted health regulations - you are doing the right thing.

 

[PurplePlatypus]

Providing her with emergency contraceptives or contraceptives in general is not the same thing as encouraging the behaviour. They should absolutely be given as children and pregnancy should not be punishments or a consequence.

Also I don?t think, generally, parents should be told either. If they are going there in the first place you might as well trust their judgment not to tell their parents. They have their reasons and itls ludicrous that anyone would think they knew better. Unless of course the kid?s in some other trouble but that is a different matter. They are at the pharmacy or in the doctor?s office handling things, why discourage that.

Also I don?t see the dilemma here, giving her the contraceptive is the only non giant dick move.

 

[righthead]

My thought is this.

You asked if the government should be encouraging underage sex by providing the morning after pill and having no punishment.

I ask if instead the government should be encouraging underage pregnancy by not.

 

[RichardThompson]

I would've required that her parents be told. A 13 year old doesn't need to be raising a child, which is also why her parents should know what she's doing.

You're a 13 year old girl. You've just had sex for the first time, and now you're worried you might be pregant.

You know you can't raise a child, and you don't want one.

Going to get the morning after pill means your parents are going to be told. You'll get in trouble, they'll be angry at you and ashamed of you. You know you're going to be in deep shit.

Do you:

1. go get the pill anyhow
2. Hide the pregnancy and abort it with a coat hanger in an alley when you can't hide it any more.

Sometimes playing the righteous one has far more serious repurcussions than simply making the best of a bad situation.

-m

Because there certainly aren't any serious repercussions to getting a back alley abortion, cause that can't kill you or anything.

Sometimes playing the righteous one can keep you alive, which is arguably better than having mommy and daddy get pissed at you.

I think that's the point he's trying to get across here.

 

[RichardThompson]

2. Should the government be encouraging underage sexual activity by not only providing the morning after pill but also by not having any form of punishment doing so. (we did not inform the authorities as it was deemed to be "appropriate")

-_-
"You've had consensual sex, TO JAIL WITH YOU, WENCH!"

actually in the UK the law favours the female, so even if he claimed that she gave consent, it can be argued that she's too young to make her own decisions, and the boy is charged with rape by manipulation. FAIR, RIGHT.

 

[Lord_Nemesis]

Should the goverment or anyone try to stop teenage sex? Fuck no, as soon as we reach puberty, we're on our own. We take the clothes off, we get steamy, we take responsibilities. They used a condom, they were responsible, not theirr fault it burst.

Sex is natural, just because in the last century some liberal twats have said that 2 14 years old going at it isnt legal doesnt mean it's not right.

They were of same age, they were careful and responsible, they knew what they were doing. They were just a tad unlucky. You and/or your pharmacist made the correct choice. Logically and moral wise.

 

[Lord_Nemesis]

Not to be a jerk but if I were you I would have said "Tough luck, make better choices." and walked away.

Harsh, so very harsh. But I lol'd xD

 

[Ionait]

I'm just throwing this out there out of curiosity more than anything else. I'm actually of the opinion of most of the other posters. You did the right thing.

As far as contacting the authorities or the parents... I'm not sure where I stand on this. A lot of people so far have said it was right not to contact anyone because the boy was also 14 and it was consensual.

Well, we've also mostly agreed in this thread that a young person will do almost ANYTHING to hide their shameful acts. (I.E. someone stated early on, if the girl knew she'd be ratted on for going to get the pill, she might have decided not to, gotten pregnant, and later had an unsafe self preformed abortion).

So who thinks that the girl COULD have been lying to protect herself or someone else? I wasn't there to read her behavior, nor was it really explained in any detail, so you have to admit that it is possible. The girl could have been raped. The boy could have been older/younger.

Should authorities or at least parents be contacted ANYWAY in these situations for the just in case?

 

[Hawgh]

I gotta agree with the approach described by the OP. Denying her the pill because she was beneath the age limit on sex, would not have been sensible, seeing as she had obviously decided not to adhere to that rule. Informing her parents could very well have led to her not coming in if a similar situation happened again. And keeping people appraised of their childrens' indiscretions is not part of a pharmaceut's job.

 

[Digitaldreamer7]

1. Was this the right decision? (should the parents have been informed? should she have been declined the pill due to being underage)
2. Should the government be encouraging underage sexual activity by not only providing the morning after pill but also by not having any form of punishment doing so. (we did not inform the authorities as it was deemed to be "appropriate")

1. yes this was the right decision - Under no circumstances should a girl be denied access to contraceptives, regardless of age or situation. This is doubly true in situations of emergency contraception. What this girl did was act responsibly (in an attempt to rectify a lapse in judgement and unfortunate accident).

Regarding her being underage - statutory rape and consent laws are in place predominantly to prevent children from being taken advantage of by people in a position of power over them by nature of age or experience. It would be ludicrous to argue that these teens had sex non-consentually, and a grievous miscarriage of the spirit of consent laws to pursue legal action.

Furthermore - pharmacists should not be permitted to disclose any medical informaion about a teen seeking their help to the teen's parents without the express consent of the patient. Doing so, for one, breaches assumed medical confidentiality, and two, actively discourages teens from pursuing responsible contraceptive precautions. Teens are going to have sex anyhow - punishing them for trying to have safer sex is asinine.

2. the government should be doing exactly what it is - providing medical care, and contraceptive / safe sex options to kids that find themselves in a bad spot.

-m

I agree with everything you say here except there's a difference in the US as opposed to the UK

Furthermore - pharmacists should not be permitted to disclose any medical informaion about a teen seeking their help to the teen's parents without the express consent of the patient. Doing so, for one, breaches assumed medical confidentiality, and two, actively discourages teens from pursuing responsible contraceptive precautions. Teens are going to have sex anyhow - punishing them for trying to have safer sex is asinine.

I agree with the fact that this is the way it should be, but, unfortunately here in the us until you are 18 or you actually have a child your parents are responsible for ALL decisions you make. Therefore the secrecy in her medical information etc is actually her parents right and not her's. Is this ethical? I think there's a fine line here because technically there wasn't a rape or molestation admitted so I would feel the same that there should be assumed confidentiality.


Since laws here are the way they are the Pharmacist would have had to call her parents. It sucks because I think that girl should be commended for doing the RESPONSIBLE thing after a mistake and not scolded like her parents probably will. The whole experience of going to a pharmacy, asking for the pill, then being questioned by a strange man about your sexual encounter was probably memorible enough that she'll be more responsible in the future.

 

[EricBC]

Good job. I do believe you scored some Light Side points for that one. Considering the situation, you did the best you could for everybody involved.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

Almost any age limit is and always will be just an arbitrary number. Cultures around the world and historically have had massively varying ideas on what kind of age someone can get married, have sex etc and its usually justifiable even if it does sometimes seem odd from a westerners perspective.
So... putting it bluntly, age laws are basically "Herp Derp everyone just magically becomes mature as soon as they turn sixteen right?" Its also pretty much impossible to enforce this kind of law about sex without being massively invasive and denying people their privacy so it is effectively a pointless law. Yes, there should be a minimum age to prevent abuse and to prevent people who are physically not 'developed' from doing something which could potentially be dangerous... but not 16. By 16 plenty of people are dying of sexual frustration or they've just decided 'feck it' and done it anyway.
We'd be better off just pressing for better education regarding sex. Other than that, people should basically be allowed to do what they want with their own bodies. Perhaps make it some kind of test. Questions like 'can you still get pregnant if you're on a period? Y/N.' If you fail, unlucky. If you pass, you get some kind of card thing and can buy condoms etc. Emergency contraceptives should always be available because IMO they are 'emergency' for a reason. We don't need more teen pregnancies.
Also the laws making it so if two people who are both underage have sex, the boy can be charged for rape even though everything was entirely consentual... wtf?


OT: you did the right thing.

 

[Phoenixlight]

Yes it's always a good idea to hand out morning after pills or anything else that will help stop the population from increasing but the parents should be informed to make them feel bad about what they've done and hopefully put them off doing it again.

 

[Canid117]

Praise to the deities that be that this did not happen in the United States:

• [li]The teenagers' identities would have been revealed and exposed to public scorn;[/li]

• 
  That would be illegal under United States law
  

  [li]The teenage boy would have been arrested and arraigned on charges of statutory rape;[/li]

  He was the same age as her so no he wouldn't
  

  [li]You two would have been sacked;[/li]

  They did the legally and morally correct thing so unless they break confidentiality then no they wouldn't
  

  [li]You shortly thereafter would have been charged with obstruction of justice and contributing to the delinquency of a minor;[/li]

  See above
  

  [li]You would be receiving death threats from Christian terrorists.[/li]

Ok I will give you that one.

 

[Rhiehn]

The mindset "if you provide a safe way to do something that is otherwise potentially (more) harmful, you're encouraging it" is terrible. More addicts end up with aids or hepatitis because there is no needle exchange or teens have to raise children because schools teach abstinence.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Right decision, and also I think the government is going about things the right way. At least when I was at school the morning after pill wasn't in any way advertised and even when discussed they actually said the rate of succes was even lower than 80%, it was literally put to us as a last resort, to be used only when all other methods had failed.

It seems to me that this girl was sensible about it (as long as she's telling the truth about the condom) and just got unlucky. A friend of mine had his girlfriend get pregnant and not only did they use a condom but it didn't burst, so they became one of that unlucky 3% or however low it is.

Justified, and so far being handled just fine by the government.

 

[Bernzz]

The right thing was done. To deny her the pill could have resulted in something much more disastrous.

 

[Kortney]

I think in an ideal world the parents should of been told. However making this protocol would probably be dangerous because many young girls would avoid getting contraception due to fear of their parents knowing what is going on - which would undoubtedly lead to bad situations.

 

[Astoria]

It's the right thing to do, there's too many preganant teenagers as it is. There's always going to be kids having underage sex, no matter what you do so the best thing to do is just help prevent pregnancies.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

@ Topic creator:

...Yeah, that's dodgy moral ground, but that's probably what I would have done too.
Although I would have given her a stern "Do you have any idea how bad this could have turned out?" talk as well.

Still, mistakes and accidents (especially with alcohol) happen, so I support your choice.