On April 8th, California enacted a law that was signed back in 2013 that allows any woman of any age to receive oral contraceptives from a pharmacy. It requires that the woman fill out a survey and bring it to the pharmacist in order for them to get the birth control that will work for them. No prescription is needed, which means a doctor’s visit can be avoided. California is now one of three states to pass a law that allows birth control to be sold in this manner. Oregon and Washington are the other two states, but D.C. also allows pharmacies to sell birth control through their own practice. This is a step in the right direction for women’s health care because it allows everyone to have access to contraceptives if they feel like they need them. However, there is some concern that a doctor’s visit is not required because in order to be safe, it is a good idea to visit a doctor before deciding to go on any type of birth control.
What this law does is allow any woman to have access to birth control through a pharmacy, even if they do not have a doctor to go to. For the women who cannot afford a doctor’s visit and are trying to be safe about their decisions, having this as an option is beneficial. Although birth control is usually used for what its name implies, it is also used for menstrual cycle regulation and helps subside painful cramping that some women have during their cycles. The drawback to not needing a prescription to get birth control means that there is not a required doctor visit. It’s a good idea to go to either a family practice doctor or gynecologist before trying to get on birth control to make sure that this is the best decision to make. However, the pharmacists do provide a screening with information about getting tested for cervical cancer and will recommend or allow a request for a certain type of birth control. This is also a good option to get contraceptives if your doctor does not prescribe it because they do not believe in it.
I can see both sides of the argument, but I think that this law will help reduce the amount of unintended pregnancies along with creating an open dialogue between mothers and daughters about safe sex. The “abstinence only” teaching of sex education is actually not very educational at all. There are definitely pros for deciding to be abstinent, such as disease prevention, but it does not teach teens to be safe if they chose not to be abstinent. Lacking knowledge about safe sex and preventing unwanted pregnancy and disease will increase the chances that teens will get those things because they will not know how to protect themselves. Telling teens to not have sex is not an effective way of preventing those implications because ultimately, they will make a choice and some will not choose to stay abstinent. Education is needed in order to keep them safe and protected.
This law is going to bring up controversy between what should and should not be sold without a prescription. Although it is not technically over the counter medicine, it is still sold without a visit to a doctor which can be seen as good or bad, depending on your personal opinion. Hopefully this will encourage parents and teens to talk about safe sex so that they can decide what the best options for them are. Sex education in high schools should also be expanded so that teens are learning how to be responsible, regardless of whether they decide to be abstinent or not.