<p>The recent decision by a federal judge to lift availability restrictions on a commonly used morning-after pregnancy prevention pill, Plan B One-Step, has caused a stir of controversy.<br />
The storm is swirling not only about the rights and wrongs of allowing young girls access to a form of emergency birth control,<br />
but also about the broader question of whether it&#8217;s appropriate for a cabinet secretary to rule on a drug&#8217;s availability for reasons other than its effectiveness and safety.</p>
<h2>What Led to the Judge&#8217;s Controversial Ruling?</h2>
<p>When the pill was first introduced in 1999 it was available by prescription only.<br />
In 2006 it became available over-the-counter to women over 18 and in 2009 Judge Edward R. Korman ruled it should be purchasable by females 17 and<br />
up without a prescription.<br />
This ultimately means that parents of teen girls will be even less knowledgeable about their actions should they have a potential health scare.<br />
Even if they don&#8217;t reach out to a parent, they&#8217;re no longer forced to reach out to someone for help and guidance.<br />
The Food and Drug Administration moved in 2011 that there should be no age restriction on who can purchase the pill but<br />
Kathleen Sebelius, the Health and Human Services secretary, overruled that decision, stating concerns that the effects of the drug on very young girls had not been studied.<br />
In early April, 2013, however, Judge Korman overruled Secretary Sebelius, stating that &#8220;the secretary&#8217;s action was politically motivated, scientifically unjustified, and<br />
contrary to agency precedent.&#8221; In his 59-page ruling he reproached the Obama administration for placing more importance on politics than on science.<br />
He stated that the administrations&#8217; failure to lift restrictions on the pill&#8217;s accessibility was &#8220;arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable.&#8221;<br />
Since Obama was campaigning at the time Secretary Sebelius made her declaration,<br />
it is suspected that the determination to restrict the pill was a politically motivated move to prevent controversy from anti-abortionists that could affect the election.</p>
<h2>Conflicting Opinions</h2>
<p>Proponents of making Plan B available to all females state that the drug has been proven safe and pregnancy presents much higher risks to young girls than the pill does.<br />
Opponents feel that this ruling endangers the health of young females, that it could be given to them against their will, or<br />
that a young woman may have contracted a sexually transmitted disease during intercourse that will be left untreated if a doctor&#8217;s visit is not required to obtain the pill.<br />
The judge gave the FDA 30 days to lift sale and age restrictions from Plan B pills and their generic counterparts. Now it is a wait and see game to discover if the administration will comply;<br />
and then to see if pharmacies and other groups or private practices will allow the sale without identification or parental consent.<br />
So where do you stand on the question? Should the morning after pill be available without restrictions?<br />
Should a cabinet secretary be able to overturn the recommendations of a regulatory agency? Tell us what you think.<br />
<strong>About the Author: </strong>Gretchen Holmes is a women&#8217;s health advocate who believes birth control should be available to all ages, but not necessarily the morning after pill.<br />
When she&#8217;s not following legislative trends aimed at health, you can find her contributing on the curezone candida forum and on other sites designed to help women suffering from different conditions.</p>

Should The Morning After Pill Really Be Available To All Ages?
