This has been discussed many, many times over the past 60-plus years, and just because other countries do it doesn’t mean we should. They are on prescription status for many reasons, and those reasons all boil down to SAFETY OF WOMEN. Why would anyone be opposed to that? Millions of women should not use them at all, and others might choose the wrong one for them and suffer dire consequences, like blood clots, as a result.
The annual Pap smear and breast exam, to get refills, and to get on it in the first place, are IMNSHO a necessity, not an option.
You need a pap smear even if you are using some other form of birth control. And a breast exam, for that matter. I think it’s condescending to gate-keep birth control for women that way. Because, you know, women need access to birth control, too.
There are lots of dangerous drugs that cause strokes that you can get without a prescription. Like cigarettes.
I think it would be terrific if we dropped the requirement that women see a doctor to get approved for birth control.
There are strong recommendations to replace the Pap smear with a self-administered swab test for HPV. No HPV=no cervical cancer (for the most part). Switching to this system would save lives by giving many people that don’t see a doctor enough to get screened and treated for a (typically) slow growing cancer. This is similar to replacing colonoscopies with DNA stool screening for low risk populations.
Would there be any age restriction to buying this kind of birth control over the counter? I can see that being a big stumbling block for Republicans because, you know, won’t someone think of the children? Would they be sitting out on a shelf, giving young girls ideas, or would women have to sidle up to the pharmacist and whisper to get them?
Your opinion is no less humble than anyone else’s, unless you’re a medical expert in this field, or a woman.
And hey, maybe we could get OTC flu tests and step tests, too. I bet there are a lot of useful tests that are no harder to administer than a pregnancy test or a covid test.
? I always thought that referring to one’s “not-so-humble opinion” was a somewhat self-deprecatory acknowledgement of the possibly arrogant degree of certainty that one felt about that particular opinion.
Not an unironic assertion of the superior truth or reliability of one’s position as compared to those of the mere humbly-opinionated rabble.
I am not opposed to the SAFETY OF WOMEN, in fact I support the SAFETY OF WOMEN.
I’m curious if women in countries where birth control pills are OTC suffer “dire consequences” at a statistically significant level that aren’t seen in the US, because of how we “protect” women by making effective birth control harder to access.
Given the current circumstances, it wouldn’t surprise me if the safety of women was improved by this, since it should reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and thus dangerous pregnancies, which now could lead to serious consequences.
Besides the other comments about this, I trust you are aware that not all women are on the pill, and would need some kind of reminder which could be used for everyone.
If they’re such a necessity why aren’t they provided equally to all, regardless of ability to pay? They’re a “necessity” in the US only if you have the money to pay for them, otherwise they will simply never get done.
I’ll also mention that those of us who were never on the Pill still managed to get our pap smears and gyn exams, and post-menopausal women (a category to which I now belong) can usually manage to get their regular check-ups along with a mammogram without needing to hold a prescription medication hostage to compel us to do so.
Well, when I had medical insurance I got my regular check-ups - years in which I had neither insurance nor money I got none. It wasn’t from some willful rebellion or irresponsibility or ignorance (I’m quite well informed for a non-medical person), it’s because in the US if you don’t have money you don’t get medical care. Yes, we’re that stupid and cruel. There have been some tiny improvements in recent years but so very inadequate to what is actually needed.
Women do not have to go to a doctor for birth control, only for specific types of birth control. Granted, those are also the most effective types of birth control but it’s not a matter of no alternatives being available.
I don’t feel I have sufficient knowledge of the matter to know if birth control pills should or shouldn’t be OTC. I do know that if they are OTC some people will misuse or even abuse them.
Gardasil does not prevent all strains of HPV, and with the vaccine becoming more common then other triggers of cervical cancer will become more “common” - not because of more cases, but because they’re are a larger percentage of cases. I really hope Gardasil doesn’t make people too complacent, or lead them to assume they’re immune to all cervical cancer. It greatly reduces the chances of getting it, but it can still happen. Just like lung cancer can happen in people who have never smoked anything in their lives.
Americans should be required a police permit for buying ammunition. That would save far more lives than requiring a physician’s permit to buy birth control does!
They are OTC in many countries whose regulatory regimes I trust. The screening for women to get BC pills is pretty minimal (been there, done that) and the package insert is much more explicit about the risks and benefits than any doctor has ever been for me. And even as a prescription drug, they are commonly mis-used. I don’t know about abused. But it’s not like they are fun party drugs that people are likely to pop lots of for kicks. And I believe you can already get Plan B OTC, so I don’t expect a significant surge in desperate women taking them inappropriately to avoid pregnancy after sex.
Is there some way that routine gynecological exams are relevant to birth control pills specifically? If the argument is just that, by requiring gyno exams to get birth control, we increase the number of gyno exams (which are necessary for other reasons), then there are a lot of other ways we could do that. We could make routine medical examinations a requirement for a driver’s license, for instance. But I think most would agree that that doesn’t make sense. Does it make more sense to make them a requirement for birth control pills?
Those are sincere questions, by the way, not rhetorical. I don’t know the answer. Maybe there’s something that’s often found in routine gyno examinations that’s a strong contraindication for birth control pills, for instance: In that case, it would make sense to require those tests before prescribing birth control pills. But, is there?
I don’t think they are. My guess is that it’s somewhat related to the fact that a prescription is needed - I’ve never had a doctor that would keep renewing prescriptions for more than a year without a visit. And Pap smears and pelvic exams used to be recommended on a yearly basis - and I’m sure that part of the reason is related to the fact that if the gyn is going to want to see you once a year before renewing the birth control prescription * and the recommendation is for Pap smear/pelvic/breast exam once a year, they may as well all happen at the same visit.
I know that some people think it’s a paternalistic sort of thing where the gyns think people won’t get exams if the prescription isn’t held hostage - but you’d think if that was the case, gyns would send reminder cards/make phone calls like optometrists and dentists. I never took the pill - and I also never got a card or phone call reminding me that it’s time for a visit.
/* even if it’s just to check your blood pressure.