Rape victim: 'Morning after' pill denied

[Kuciwalker]

Er, why would I have cared about birth control in the late 90s?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes... why care about news... such as that whole impeachment thing... pffft... why care about it?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Wiki Link for Kuci

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
But RU-486 (legal in the US now, remember) doesn't.

Anyway, you are correct. However, the difference is that RU-486 terminates a pregnancy, while the morning-after pill (usually a triple dose of a typical OCP) prevents the pregnancy from starting in the first place. Moreover, the morning after pill is a one-shot deal; RU-486 requires close monitoring over a couple days, as well as a second, different medication given two days later.

[Kuciwalker]

What impeachment thing?

Spoiler:

yes, I'm kidding

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yes... why care about news... such as that whole impeachment thing... pffft... why care about it?

You may have missed that I was 11 in 1999. Most kids that age don't care about birth control... at least, I hope they don't.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You can't vote either at 11... I guess you didn't care who the President was, eh?

[Kuciwalker]

At the time? Not really, no.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, let's just say I do find it quite amazing that you can talk on and on about the morning after pill and abortion and yet have never heard of RU-486.

[Kuciwalker]

Where am I supposed to have heard of it? Those other things are commonly discussed.

[Guynemer]

RU-486 is commonly discussed as well. Not as frequently as it used to be, but it is still in the news fairly frequently.

Regardless, lay off him a bit, Imran. He was a bit young at the time to know a lot about it.

[Mal@N.Z.]

This was on the http://www.nzherald.co.nz/ site


Catholic GP's stance 'could lift rate of teen pregnancy'

17.10.05
By Martin Johnston


A women's health lobbyist fears that Catholic doctors' refusal to prescribe contraceptive pills risks pushing the nation's already high teenage pregnancy rate even higher.

A Nelson Catholic and general practitioner has told 50 female patients that for religious reasons he will no longer prescribe artificial contraception.

Others in Auckland are considering similar action.

Auckland Women's Health Council co-ordinator Lynda Williams said yesterday that prescribing contraceptives to teenage girls when they sought them was vital.

Not doing so would increase teenage pregnancies, "unless they are given timely referrals and urged to go immediately to another provider".

"It's very much an opportunistic thing. You've got to seize the moment, not make them go off and make another appointment somewhere. Teenagers are very 'now' people."

She was also concerned about rural women missing out on services they wanted if their area's sole GP refused to provide them.

Nelson GP Dr Joseph Hassan, a 40-year-old married father of four, wrote to the 50 patients a fortnight ago telling them he would no longer prescribe contraceptives or refer women for sterilisation.

The letter, which listed doctors who would provide the services, told patients their fertility was a gift to be looked after and not something to be treated with medication like a disease.

"I have done this in response to a personal journey," he told the Herald. " ... I have been praying about God's direction on this in my life. Over the last few weeks, in various ways, I have felt this is the direction I should take."

Dr Hassan, who also opposes abortion and has set up a crisis support programme as an alternative, said he had long been troubled by the conflict between the Church's teaching on contraception and his medical practice. He said other doctors would prescribe contraception and his move would not increase the teen pregnancy rate, which was due to other factors, "not just a lack of contraception".

New Zealand has the third-highest teenage pregnancy rate in the developed world. In 2002, 3 per cent of female teenagers aged between 15 and 19 became pregnant.

Ms Williams said she was surprised by Dr Hassan's move. "It's really out-of-the-Ark stuff these days."

Dr Hassan said he knew of at least five other Catholic GPs who had had "a similar kind of journey to me".

Women's Health Action director Jo Fitzpatrick said she did not object to GPs following Dr Hassan's decision, as long as they made their stance known, so women did not turn up only to be refused.

Catholic Church spokeswoman Lyndsay Freer said his move was in accord with the Church's teaching.

Dr Hassan is the sole doctor at his suburban clinic and he receives Government money through a Primary Health Organisation (PHO). The Health Ministry says PHOs must provide a comprehensive range of primary health services, but not every contracted medical practice has to provide every service.

The rules

* Under Health Ministry rules, Primary Health Organisations must provide a comprehensive range of primary health services.

* But not every contracted medical practice has to provide the full range.

* The Medical Association's code of ethics lets doctors refuse to care for a particular patient if alternative care is available and the patient knows how to access it, although not in emergencies, and the code does not permit illegal discrimination.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

First tings first, If by simply stating that men cant make a womans decison is biggotry then i am guilty. I have never and I repeat never said men cannot have their opinions. Have them out your wazoo pat i dont care. It doesnt mean that i or anyone else, male or female has to agree with them. This whole thread that i have been following has jumped from topic to topic including what drs can and cant do to abortion to whatever else there is. The pharamicist was wrong to not give this women her perscription. He proved that for once he could not perform the duties inculded in his job description, therefore depriving, a woman, in this case her rightly perscribed medication.
Third, The mentin of catholic hospitals doing this and that some is true and some isnt. The hospital that i currently work at still will not perform tubal ligations or vasectomies. They do however allow the lady to recieve the morning after pill. Most drs practicing cannnot refuse to treat a patient in emergent situations. MOst drs, act on a conscience decison what they feel is best for their patient. They are not always right for they are not gods and cannot perform miracles. these are Mds or ods. I dont think a pharmacist takes an oath like the mds etc. thought they are considerd drs since they recieved a phd.
For Kuci, Yes he is young enough to not know of the ru 486. I have heard of it but it isnt used often any more here so i dont have much experience with that drug. Being that I am 36 and a nurse and not completly aware of its existance pretty much lets kuci off the wire.
Lats but not least I mentioned that hospital pharmacies dont fill patients perscriptions. They dont. while that patient is in the hospital this is called a drs order. not a perscription. The hospital pharmacists has every right to question an order. He then will contact the dr personnaly and get the order confirmed if the dr tells him it is right he must follow those orders. Now mind you i said he can question the order and even send warnings with the medication to the nurse that will administer that order. So you see even in hospitals the pharamcists are obligated to follow the doctors orders.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Most last and of all least, I cant spell worth a whoopty do. But then everyone here already knows that. I have no defense for that but to say yall are lucky you dont have to read my handwriting After reading horrible dr handwritting and being dyslexic all these years, i never had a chance

[monolith94]

Originally posted by Winston
Funny. In my book, you're the stupid one. And quite aggressively so.

See, two can play.

You're a raging nincompoop the likes of which hath not been seen since Ancient Rome.