More than a week after Wisconsin's top law official announced intentions to join a lawsuit pushing for easier access to the Plan B emergency contraceptive pill, two University of Wisconsin student groups held a forum Thursday to discuss the matter.
On March 15, state Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager filed a motion for Wisconsin to join the lawsuit, which aims to take action against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for its delay in approving Plan B for over-the-counter purchase. Lautenschlager and others involved in the lawsuit against the FDA charge the agency has been intentionally dragging its feet on the approval of Plan B.
UW Law Students for Choice and Medical Students for Choice held the panel discussion to address issues surrounding the possible implications of Wisconsin becoming a plaintiff in the lawsuit.
According to Assistant Attorney General Richard Briles Moriarty, the central question for Wisconsin to answer is whether becoming a plaintiff in the lawsuit would be in the best interest of the state.
"Can we articulate interests that the state of Wisconsin [not just individual citizens] has by the FDA refusing to move Plan B from prescription to over-the-counter?" Moriarty said.
Moriarty said Wisconsin interests are affected by the FDA's refusal to allow over-the-counter distribution of Plan B because of medical and childcare expenses the state pays when women become pregnant unintentionally.
And teenage pregnancies are especially costly, Moriarty added.
"When women 19 or under become pregnant, it has dramatic adverse effects on that mother … that affects Wisconsin in expenses they have to pay," he said.
Associate Director of University Health Services Scott Spear said the FDA approved Plan B for prescription use in 1999, but has been rejecting over-the-counter distribution since May 2004, citing "safety issues with teens."
Spear — who supports over-the-counter distribution of Plan B — said the FDA's claim is unfounded.
"[Teens] may handle pregnancy differently, but there is no evidence they handle this drug any differently," Spear said.
Moriarty said the FDA attested there was no way to know the effects of Plan B on women 16 years or younger and that the FDA's statements regarding teen safety issues are "entirely untrue."
According to Moriarty, the FDA's own studies proved that women of all age and literacy groups understood the directions on the label and used the drug properly in a simulated use; he added there are various studies confirming the safety of Plan B.
In accordance with the FDA's concern about Plan B's effect on adolescents, hearings are being held to discuss a proposal that would allow the release of Plan B for over-the-counter purchase to customers who show photo identification.
Spear made a clear distinction that Plan B can prevent pregnancy if taken within a few days of having sex, but the drug does not induce an abortion.
"With its use, we can prevent significant numbers of unintended pregnancies and prevent the need for abortion … [it is a] very important, very useful, very safe drug," Spear said.
According to Spear, Plan B reduces risk of pregnancy by 95 percent if taken within 24 hours but can be considered effective for up to 120 hours.
Spear and Moriarty believe that keeping Plan B as prescription-only voids the long-run effectiveness of the drug.
Responding to critics who claim that the reason only eight states in America make Plan B available in pharmacies is because of a lack of demand, Moriarty said, "It is not in demand because you don't have it."
Spear enforced the importance and convenience an over-the-counter emergency contraceptive would provide.
"Any woman who is fertile should have it in their medicine cabinets, just like you have band-aids and Ibuprofen," Spear said.
