Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. (/Thread-Birth-control-abortion-and-unwanted-pregnancies) |
RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - Belsnickel - 08-16-2016 (08-15-2016, 03:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, I thought we were talking about making these things more available; not current policy. Well, yeah, but nurses, unless they are a NP, and most school nurses aren't that I have known, don't have the authority to prescribe anything at all, in any setting. So what would make one think that would change? RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - bfine32 - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 06:07 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, yeah, but nurses, unless they are a NP, and most school nurses aren't that I have known, don't have the authority to prescribe anything at all, in any setting. So what would make one think that would change? Once again you are talking current policy. I am pretty sure there are some states where the pharmacist can prescribe birth control pills. I thought the topic of the OP was to make such measures more available to minors. It appears, in typical fashion, that some have gotten wrapped around the axle by the suggestion that a school medical official could make these measures more available. Did you really just asked me what makes me think the policy would change with a policy change? But to answer the question: To make birth control more available to minor girls. Who do you suggest should be able to prescribe birth control (pills, IUDs, ect...) to minor girls without parental consent, that would make it easier for them to obtain? RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - GMDino - 08-16-2016 If you don't know your teen is having sex why would you complain that your teen is using proper birth control and has been educated about it? Wait...you didn't really want an answer except to try and pigeon hole the responder and further divert the thread. My bad. Anyway... http://www.larc4co.com/ Quote:(DENVER, April 27, 2016) – With Governor John Hickenlooper’s signature on the state budget, Colorado will increase funding for a public health program instrumental in reducing teen pregnancy and the teen abortion rates by 48 percent. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - Belsnickel - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 10:33 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Once again you are talking current policy. I am pretty sure there are some states where the pharmacist can prescribe birth control pills. I thought the topic of the OP was to make such measures more available to minors. It appears, in typical fashion, that some have gotten wrapped around the axle by the suggestion that a school medical official could make these measures more available. I just don't understand why you think that medical professionals currently unable to prescribe drugs would suddenly be able to prescribe drugs. That sort of shift in the medical field goes far deeper than the idea of making contraceptives more accessible. That would be my issue with the logic you are putting on display, here. Especially when it comes to a school nurse who does not have access to medical records, family history, etc. There are many types of oral contraceptives on the market and some medical conditions or family history may be contraindications to being prescribed certain ones. So you're saying a health care professional that has no access to any of this information would suddenly be able to prescribe a medication? (08-16-2016, 10:33 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Who do you suggest should be able to prescribe birth control (pills, IUDs, ect...) to minor girls without parental consent, that would make it easier for them to obtain? Hadn't thought about it, mostly because I haven't advocated for teenagers to be on contraceptives without parental consent. I just chimed in on thsi because of the ridiculous assumption that school nurses would be able to prescribe anything. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 10:33 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Once again you are talking current policy. I am pretty sure there are some states where the pharmacist can prescribe birth control pills. I thought the topic of the OP was to make such measures more available to minors. It appears, in typical fashion, that some have gotten wrapped around the axle by the suggestion that a school medical official could make these measures more available. Again, maybe you should read the article first before making ridiculous arguments about school nurses prescribing things they aren't allowed to prescribe because they don't have the medical credentials. Then you might know who is prescribing these forms a birth control in Colorado for this program. I think we need to start implementing a quiz which people must pass before they are allowed to enter the conversation RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 11:18 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I just don't understand why you think that medical professionals currently unable to prescribe drugs would suddenly be able to prescribe drugs. That sort of shift in the medical field goes far deeper than the idea of making contraceptives more accessible. That would be my issue with the logic you are putting on display, here. Especially when it comes to a school nurse who does not have access to medical records, family history, etc. There are many types of oral contraceptives on the market and some medical conditions or family history may be contraindications to being prescribed certain ones. So you're saying a health care professional that has no access to any of this information would suddenly be able to prescribe a medication? He isn't using logic, Matt. He's doing what he always does. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - bfine32 - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 11:18 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Hadn't thought about it, mostly because I haven't advocated for teenagers to be on contraceptives without parental consent. I just chimed in on thsi because of the ridiculous assumption that school nurses would be able to prescribe anything. So you really had nothing constructive to add to the conversation? We get a lot of that around here. In the OP the article references a child's clinic where IUDs and implants are provided. After reading that and the measures, I shared my view that I thought the program(s) is a good idea; however, the only sticking point would be parental consent to such devices. When some said they would have no issue with their child being prescribed such things, I followed up with what this could mean (a school medical official facilitating access to these devices). Yet instead of addressing the forest of parental consent for these programs we found a tree that caught our eye. So allow me to rephrase in a "non-ridiculous" manner (I'm sure you and others will let me know if it ridiculous): Would folks be OK with whomever is authorized to prescribe pills, IUDs, implants, ect... prescribing these to their minor daughter without consent? RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - GMDino - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 11:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So you really had nothing constructive to add to the conversation? We get a lot of that around here. (08-16-2016, 11:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So allow me to rephrase in a "non-ridiculous" manner (I'm sure you and others will let me know if it ridiculous): I'll repeat: If you did not know your teen was having sex why would you be upset with them getting proper birth control and education about it? So the answer is yes, I would be OK with it because in your scenario I don't know what my child is doing anyway. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - PhilHos - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 04:05 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The article did point out some flaws in the study. But, I got the impression the person reviewing the study wasn't being objective in their critique. It's getting late so I don't want to get into all of it maybe tomorrow. It's not talking about the LARC's being effective in the future, it's talking about if the PROGRAM that provides them will still be effective in the future after the initial LARC's expire. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 11:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So you really had nothing constructive to add to the conversation? We get a lot of that around here. Attack the message, not the messenger. Follow your own advice or stop being a hypocrite. Matt pointed out school nurses don't have prescribing privileges. That's constructive despite your passive aggressive insult. Quote:In the OP the article references a child's clinic where IUDs and implants are provided. After reading that and the measures, I shared my view that I thought the program(s) is a good idea; however, the only sticking point would be parental consent to such devices. When some said they would have no issue with their child being prescribed such things, I followed up with what this could mean (a school medical official facilitating access to these devices). You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig. This program doesn't give prescribing privileges to those that aren't qualified to write prescriptions. Calling a school nurse a "school medical official" doesn't make a school nurse qualified to write prescriptions. And IUDs involve a procedure to insert them. Do school nurses do ob/gyn exams and procedures? Quote:Yet instead of addressing the forest of parental consent for these programs we found a tree that caught our eye. The forest is access. Parental consent to obtain access is a tree within the forest of access. Quote:So allow me to rephrase in a "non-ridiculous" manner (I'm sure you and others will let me know if it ridiculous): This question has already been answered on page 1 before you began another passive aggressive hissy fit. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - PhilHos - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 11:22 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I think we need to start implementing a quiz which people must pass before they are allowed to enter the conversation But that'll take the fun right out of this forum! Plus, that's racist. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 12:09 PM)PhilHos Wrote: It's not talking about the LARC's being effective in the future, it's talking about if the PROGRAM that provides them will still be effective in the future after the initial LARC's expire. The program does what? Provides free LARCs to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If they do, the program is effective. So Callie Gables is claiming the program is effective. But, how will we know it is effective later after we already know it is effctive? Well, we know it was effective because the number of unwanted pregnancies decreased. If a woman doesn't go back and get a second LARC after the first expired doesn't change the fact that the number of unwanted pregnancies was already decreased before the LARC expired and needs to be replaced. Let's simplify it to one woman. She gets a LARC. She doesn't have an unwanted pregnancy during the shelf life of the LARC. How do we know it was effective? Because she didn't have an unwanted pregnancy. Now let's say she doesn't get a second LARC after the first expired. Whatever happens from that point forward doesn't change the fact that she didn't become pregnant up to that point. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - PhilHos - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 12:30 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The program does what? Provides free LARCs to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If they do, the program is effective. What if said person does NOT get a LARC yet still does not have an unwanted pregnancy during the same time period? How effective would you say the LARC program was then? LARC's certainly are effective at preventing pregnancy. But that's not the question. The question is did this program have a positive effect on decreasing something that was already in decline and declined in places this program was not present? I think it's safe to say it had SOME effect, but to the point where it should be implemented at tax payer expense? That's a different story. (I'm not saying it does or it doesn't; just that more research is needed.) RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - Rotobeast - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 12:37 PM)PhilHos Wrote: What if said person does NOT get a LARC yet still does not have an unwanted pregnancy during the same time period? How effective would you say the LARC program was then?I can't trust any of the data in any of the studies presented. I need more information. How attractive were these women ? All subjects should be referred to me, for thorough evaluation. Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 12:37 PM)PhilHos Wrote: What if said person does NOT get a LARC yet still does not have an unwanted pregnancy during the same time period? How effective would you say the LARC program was then? That is one of the fair criticism of the paper. But, when Callie Gable analyzed the data she was guilty of blatant conformational bias by accepting data which supported her opinion while rejected data which didn't. Quote:LARC's certainly are effective at preventing pregnancy. Seems the researchers, Callie Gable, and you agree they are effective at reducing unwanted pregnancies. Quote:But that's not the question. The question is did this program have a positive effect on decreasing something that was already in decline and declined in places this program was not present? I think it's safe to say it had SOME effect, but to the point where it should be implemented at tax payer expense? That's a different story. (I'm not saying it does or it doesn't; just that more research is needed.) How many abortions need to be prevented for a program like this to be deserving of tax payers dollars? RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - PhilHos - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 12:53 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: That is one of the fair criticism of the paper. But, when Callie Gable analyzed the data she was guilty of blatant conformational bias by accepting data which supported her opinion while rejected data which didn't. She may be analyzing the data through a filter of bias, but I didn't see her reject data that didn't support her opinion. I saw her question data and gave reasons for why it should be called into question and acknolwedged the data that supported the claims that she was critiquing, but I don't recall reading her rejecting any data because of her biases. oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:Seems the researchers, Callie Gable, and you agree they are effective at reducing unwanted pregnancies. So do condoms. So does abstinence. The question is if making the more expensive LARCs available to more people will it have the effect on a societal problem to the point that it justifies its cost. If the problem is already declining at the same rate without this program, then I would say the cost is NOT justified. That's why I'd like to see a more comprehensive study done. oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:How many abortions need to be prevented for a program like this to be deserving of tax payers dollars? That's a good question. Off the top of my head, I'd say that if it lowers the abortion rate by, at least, 10-15% I'd probably be okay with some tax payer dollars going towards this. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-16-2016 Quote:So how could one attribute the 34 percent decline in abortion rates to the CFPI? Almost the same reduction — about 85 percent of the reduction we saw in CFPI counties — still happened in places where the program wasn’t available. This makes sense because abortion rates have been dropping steadily for years (including among younger women): Quote:It’s more curious that the abortion rate for women 20–24 rose slightly in the non-CFPI counties while that statistic dropped noticeably where the program was available. But with the very limited evidence the study presents, we have no idea if this is just due to random variation. Here she is analyzing data from a single chart. The data from the first qoute "makes sense" because it confirms her bias. The data from the second quote is dismissed because it doesn't confirm her bias citing "very limited data" and we have no idea if this is just "random variation." If she is going to reject the data because it is limited and random variation, she has to reject all the data for the same reason. You can't accept the data you like and reject the data you don't like. If she is going to ignore the limitations she cited when analyzing the data she liked she has to do the same with the data she didn't like. She isn't objective at all. It's blatant conformational bias and while she has some valid criticism on the limitations of the study, ultimately she undermines her credibility so severely her overall critique can't be taken seriously. If you have doubts about the study, you should have bigger doubts about her critique. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - PhilHos - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 03:00 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Here she is analyzing data from a single chart. The data from the first qoute "makes sense" because it confirms her bias. The data from the second quote is dismissed because it doesn't confirm her bias citing "very limited data" and we have no idea if this is just "random variation." I don't see it as her rejecting data, though. She mentions it and while she tries to explain it away as a "we don't know why", I don't see it as a total rejection. In any event, if one little thing like this is enough to throw her whole critique out, then shouldn't you be doing the same for the study she's critiquing? She may be biased, but as you even admitted, she has some valid criticism. So if you're standard is "one problem=throw the whole hting out" shouldn't you be doing that for the original study as well? RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-16-2016 (08-16-2016, 08:35 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't see it as her rejecting data, though. She mentions it and while she tries to explain it away as a "we don't know why", I don't see it as a total rejection. The alternative explanation for the increase in unwanted pregnancies in the counties the program wasn't available and a decrease in unwanted pregnancies in the counties where the program was available would be the program was effective. That is the conclusion she should have reached if she accepted the data for the other age group. But, she didn't and then cited reasons she didn't apply to the other age group. Quote:In any event, if one little thing like this is enough to throw her whole critique out, then shouldn't you be doing the same for the study she's critiquing? She may be biased, but as you even admitted, she has some valid criticism. So if you're standard is "one problem=throw the whole hting out" shouldn't you be doing that for the original study as well? You told me you didn't see where she rejected data based upon confirmational bias. I showed you an example. That doesn't mean it is the only time she did it. I'm not going to go through it point for point because even when I show where she rejected the data you deny she did when even you state she "tried to explain it away." If she is tried to explain it away that is because she rejected it. You don't explain away data or conclusions you accept. I'm not dismissing her critique based upon "one little thing." It is based upon a pattern of a lack of objectivity, confirmational bias, a repeated inability to analyze the data, a disregard for the scientific method, and the single most ignorant comment I've ever read criticizing a study's findings weighed against her valid criticism of the studies limitation which leads me to conclude she has almost zero credibility. Again, she does have some valid criticism regarding the studies limitations, but as a whole that critique is a farce. A valid critique is to the original Ghostbusters as her critique is to the remake. RE: Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies. - PhilHos - 08-17-2016 (08-16-2016, 09:20 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The alternative explanation for the increase in unwanted pregnancies in the counties the program wasn't available and a decrease in unwanted pregnancies in the counties where the program was available would be the program was effective. That is the conclusion she should have reached if she accepted the data for the other age group. But, she didn't and then cited reasons she didn't apply to the other age group. Look, I openly admitted at the beginning that I posted this mainly to spur discussion - which I think it has, to some degree, but at this point, I think we're at the point where neither of our viewpoints are going to change and any further discussion is going to involve rehashing the same arguments over and over. So let's just agree to disagree, okay? |