Editorials Respond To Court Ruling That FDA Actions On Plan B Contraceptive Tainted By Politics

Main Category: Women's Health / Gynecology
Also Included In: Sexual Health / STDs;  Regulatory Affairs / Drug Approvals;  Public Health
Article Date: 26 Mar 2009 - 6:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Two newspapers published editorials in response to a federal judge's recent order that FDA reconsider age restrictions on nonprescription sales of the emergency contraceptive Plan B and that FDA allow nonprescription sales to women ages 17 and older within 30 days. Summaries appear below.

~ Los Angeles Times: "The campaign to make Plan B available without a prescription was based on solid medical grounds," a Times editorial says, adding that the "response of the FDA, which the public relies on to make equally solid medical decisions, was an embarrassing new low that prompted the agency's director of women's health to resign." The editorial says, "Objections that the pill would entice girls into earlier and more promiscuous sex were not only unfounded … but irrelevant. It was never part of the FDA's job to monitor moral behavior among adolescents." According to the Times, there is "justified glee in the scientific community over the announcement by President Obama that science will be shown due respect under his administration." It concludes, "As welcome as this new direction is, the court's review of the FDA's actions provides an even more significant reassurance that the government will be held to account no matter who is in power at the moment" (Los Angeles Times, 3/25).

~ New York Times: "A federal judge in New York has added his weight to contentions that the Bush administration delayed easy, nonprescription access to" Plan B for "political and ideological reasons, not from a desire to protect the public's health," a Times editorial says. It adds that the "World Health Organization and a slew of American health groups had urged that the pill be made available without prescription and without age restrictions, and virtually all major industrialized nations did so years ago." However, the Bush administration, through FDA, "found excuse after excuse for delaying a decision and narrowing its ultimate scope, presumably to placate Mr. Bush's base of social and religious conservatives." The editorial adds that the "harder question is whether to remove all age and other restrictions," concluding that the "judge sensibly left that issue to the FDA, which can presumably be trusted to make a fair assessment now that it will be under new leadership" (New York Times, 3/25).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations