Pamela Pilch at HMS Blog points out a problem with the proposed, over-the-counter morning-after pill:
Besides all the usual (and correct) arguments against the morning after pill, there is one argument I never hear expressed in the MSM, but which should be appealing to secular women and radical feminists. It was first brought to my attention by Dr. Hanna Klaus. And that is that women are being economically exploited by the morning after pill. Because women can only become pregnant for a few days per cycle, many women will use the morning after pill on days on which they couldn’t have gotten pregnant anyway. For each dose of the morning after pill, they are paying as much as they would pay for a whole month’s worth of regular birth control pills (which is still a lot more than they would be paying to use natural family planning!).
This burden will fall most heavily on young girls who are too scared to go to a physician for regular BCPs, but who engage in unprotected sex several times a month. They may substitute the MAP regularly for unprotected sex and be spending much more money each month on it than if they just used regular BCPs.
Not just that. What about women without health insurance? It takes a doctor’s visit to get a birth-control pill prescription. Suppose a substantial subset of uninsured women begin to use the MAP as their primary means of birth control? Has anyone determined what is the effect of taking the MAP several times a month for a year or more?
bearing blog 