A New Jersey man learned the hard way that some folks aren’t ready for men to play an equal role in contraception.
There is no shortage of calls for men to “step up” when it comes to parenting and birth control. And I agree. Men and women are in this together and both sides should be pulling weight so to speak.
I’m sure that is what employees at a Rite Aid drugstore in Jersey City had in mind when they refused to sell a supply of Plan B pills (aka “the morning after pill”) to 25 year old Andrew Andrade, right? Yes, you read that right.
On April 23 Andrade went to the drugstore to purchase them for his girlfriend and was told that he could not buy them. Why could he not buy them? “I can’t sell it to you because you are male.”
That’s right. Apparently Rite Aid, or at least this particular Rite Aid seems to have a policy against men buying Plan B pills.
Thankfully there was another drugstore down the street, Bond Drugs, that had no problem selling them to him.
As we can see, we have a bit of a mix-up in messages here. We hear calls for men to take responsibility for contraception, but in cases like this, when we do we have to put up with being denied the ability to do so.
What do you think?
Is there a clear message on what society wants men to do in regards to birth control?
Is this a sign that some people just don’t want men to do their part?
If a more complex version of an over the counter male birth control option were to hit the market would we then have the occasional story of women being told they can’t buy it because they are female?
About Danny
Are you kidding me? My fiance was able to buy Plan B for me two times where I live–and with no problems what-so-ever. And we live in Bible belt Georgia, state of ignorant fools who are against all sorts of things like homosexuality and bodily autonomy.
Hey! >__<
As a proud son of Savannah, GA with plenty of family from the decidedly more rural Colquitt, GA as well, I just felt compelled to offer my own two cents. I don't think Georgia is a "state of ignorant fools who are against all sorts of things like homosexuality and bodily autonomy." … Or, you know… not *just* as state of fools… and really, in my experience, not a state of fools more than any other… (wisdom, justice, moderation! ~ and y'all have a nice day!)
The problem is, and this is why I found this article in the first place, every news outlet quotes it as ‘women will be allowed to buy….’ not that its approved for anyone 18 to buy.
Dumb. But I doubt it was a management policy. Sometimes sales clerks aren’t properly trained or don’t understand store policies. I once told a clerk at the pharmacy counter that I needed a 48-tablet box of sudafed (I have bad allergies) and she said they only had 24-tablet boxes in stock. So I asked if I could have two 24-tablet boxes and she said no, it’s against the law. I could not convince her that it made NO sense that the law would allow me to buy a 48-tablet box but NOT two 24-tablet boxes. They even had a sign up explaining the law, but that wasn’t good enough for her. I finally had to speak to the manager.
Why is the tittle even phrased as a question?
Maybe they thought he was going to use it to spike a drink and force someone to have an abortion/miscarriage they didn’t want. It doesn’t make sense as they let women buy condoms and they don’t have the anatomy to use them.
I have been turned down twice at two different pharmacies. (And I am a woman.) In both cases the pharmacist didn’t believe I should be buying the product…
What’s the shelf life? I’d want some in the emergency supplies!
Does anyone know how Plan B is classified on the controlled substances schedules?
The controlled substances act is REALLY draconian, and it’s often difficult to predict the outcome of a government investigation. Also keep in mind that many states have their own laws about controlled substances (like how many (most?) states now require a government ID to buy pseudoephedrine).
This sounds like someone trying to avoid liability, and the controlled substances act is probably the source of the liability.
For example, the rule on schedule V drug sales is simply:
“No controlled substance in schedule V which is a drug may be distributed or dispensed other than for a medical purpose.”
Keep in mind that this is the lowest schedule, so we’re talking non-prescription drugs. If a pharmacist were to dispense one for a non-medical purpose, then they would effectively have violated the act and be open to civil fines and license revocation. As a man cannot medically use Plan B, it does seem like there could be a real problem here dispensing Plan B to men, especially if you are a risk averse corporation.
“As a man cannot medically use Plan B…”
A trans man can. The existence of trans men should be enough by itself to show that sale of Plan B should not be denied to men.
I’m not agreeing with the policy, I’m just saying that we need to consider the larger legal framework.
In most states private business have a right to “refuse service” to anyone, provided they do not fall under the “public accommodation” doctrine that hotels, restaurants, and some entertainment venues are subject to.
As a result, it’s very hard to create liability from refusing service. However, it is very easy to create liability from dispensing a drug because the controlled substances act is so unyielding.
Is this a good policy? Definitely not. But we need to consider whether this is really the fault of Rite Aid, or just a symptom of the larger, and ongoing, regulatory failure that is the controlled substances act.
It may not be hateful – but it is stupid and unfortunately there is no cure for stupid. However Plan B is a good step in that direction. Maybe if fewer people had children then the gene pool would be less crowded with the hopelessly/ willfully ignorant, uninformed and just plain stupid.
I wasn’t commenting on the legal framework, large or small, just pointing out that the idea that Plan B is useless to men is a false one. The argument about right to refuse service vs right to receive service is one in which I feel I have nothing new to add.
I think this is another way that the onus for reproductive choice is placed solely on females, and males are not only not included, but actively excluded. I was put in a situation where I needed Plan B, and I was actually quite perturbed that, although the man who had put me in that situation ‘felt badly’ and ‘didn’t want a child’, he also didn’t even bother to offer to take any sort of fiscal responsibility for purchasing Plan B. Instead, it fell directly on me to purchase it and ensure that he did not become a progenitor. And you know, I’m still a little angry about that (also – drunk sex is kind of like drunk driving and probably ought not to happen!). Just because it was my uterus, doesn’t mean I am the only one responsible. But males are not brought into these conversations a lot of the time (other than lectures about using condoms, it seems that reproductive control is relegated mostly to females). And so most men don’t feel any sort of culpability in this area. And it’s made worse by policies like this in which a male is actively playing a role in reproductive choice/responsibility, but is denied that right. We really need to alter how we talk about reproductive rights, and we need to make sure that males are being afforded options, as well.
“I was put in a situation where I needed Plan B, and I was actually quite perturbed that, although the man who had put me in that situation ‘felt badly’ and ‘didn’t want a child’, he also didn’t even bother to offer to take any sort of fiscal responsibility for purchasing Plan B. ”
Unless he raped you, you both put yourselves into that position. Becareful with language, it can be quite insulting. What makes you assume most men don’t feel culpability?
After conception, men have zero reproductive rights, the entire decision is up to the woman, he can’t choose abortion, adoption without her consent, etc. I totally agree on affordingthem options, financial abortion (basically walk away, but after helping to pay for abortion if SHE chooses) needs to be an option. Responsibility to not ejaculate inside a woman you don’t wish to get pregnant is his, but responsibility for post conception options is pretty much entirely up to her at the moment. After all only SHE can choose to abort, and only she can choose to take the plan B stuff. It’d be great thought if the guys pay for it, but I doubt the majority won’t pay, if possible I’d have a supply ready on hand incase shit happens as I truly don’t want a child at the moment. But the reality is until birth, men are along for the ride, much of their responsibility and agency ends after ejaculation and sits on pause until birth, even then they’re forced to follow the choice of the mother regardless of their own wishes, at the very least forced to help financially with raising the kid or possibly face jail (not sure if “deadbeat” mums n dads get jailed here in Aus)
I agree that men should pay half the costs of BC, it’s only fair. Both parties “get themselves in those situations” so both parties should be responsible.
Bring on risug.
“it’s made worse by policies like this in which a male is actively playing a role in reproductive choice/responsibility, but is denied that right. ”
See the revealing article here on TGMP about how the Affordable Care Act (“ObamaCare”) requires insurance reimbursement for contraceptives for women, and specifically says men are not required this coverage, and there is no legal liability in this (can’t be called illegal discrimination).
It effectively rules out development of “the male pill” or other alternatives to condoms.
I agree, I think contraception should be a thing to do together and it’s frustrating the ACA is working against this.
“There is no shortage of calls for men to “step up” when it comes to…birth control.”
How silly of me. All these years I thought that men stepping up when it comes to birth control meant that they use it and not put all the responsibility for preventing a pregnancy on the woman. I had no idea it meant that he should buy it for the woman, or in other words, continue to put all the responsibility for preventing a pregnancy on the woman.
Like it or not, the pill is available for women, not for men. When risug is made available I’ll use it.
All these years I thought that men stepping up when it comes to birth control meant that they use it and not put all the responsibility for preventing a pregnancy on the woman.
No it means what you say here PLUS men being able to all that they can to do their part in contraception.
1. A woman wanting her guy to go get her contraception.
2. A woman wanting her guy to chip in on her contraception.
3. A guy getting his own contraception.
4. A guy taking steps towards safe sex.
All of that is stepping up.
I had no idea it meant that he should buy it for the woman, or in other words, continue to put all the responsibility for preventing a pregnancy on the woman.
Yes that is a part of it. For whatever reason this guy ended up being the one to go out to the store to get his lady her Plan B supply. In their situation that was his part. I’m sure that’s not good enough for you but guess what, I don’t like the idea that that is the most he can do either.
Which is why I’m all for RISUG, ultrasound (apparently a blast of sound waves to the testicles can stop sperm production for about 6 months), condoms, vasectomy, hormonal pills, and anything else that comes along that will give guys more birth control options.
Or are you one of those people that would rather just sit and complain until those things come along (and then act like no man has ever wanted to do more) and give the stink eye to men that are doing what they can to take part in the mean time, however small?
So yeah all he did was run to store and for now most of the responsibility of birth control is all on women. But would you rather he at least go to the store or would you rather have a story like Jasmine’s here in the comment section where she had to put up with a guy that wouldn’t even do something as small as help pay for it? I can’t speak for Jasmine but I bet if he had at least been willing to chip in on the cost she might have thought more highly of him (or at least more highly of his stance on birth control).
Danny, it simply never occurred to me that a man paying for and/or picking up contraception from a pharmacy for the woman to use is considered “pulling [his] weight”. She is still the only one using prevention. To me, a man “stepping up” regarding birth control means your #3. I want to emphasize this part of it – “getting his own contraception”. Because the man starts using birth control does not mean the woman should stop.
It takes both male and female participation for fertilization, why would one be less accountable than the other to prevent it? IMO, every individual who engages in sex and who wants to avoid an unintended pregnancy has the duty to take action to keep it from happening. Even though the female has more options available to her than does the male, it does not mean he has none. When both parties use birth control, if one form fails there is the other to provide protection. That would limit the occasions when someone may feel, using Jasmine’s words in her comment, that the other person “put [them] in a situation” they did not want.
If YOU do not want a child, then YOU do what it takes to not create one. Do not expect or depend on the other person to shoulder your responsibility. Anyone who does not use birth control is ceding, whether by neglect or conscious decision, their reproduction control to their sexual partner.
Danny, it simply never occurred to me that a man paying for and/or picking up contraception from a pharmacy for the woman to use is considered “pulling [his] weight”.
Its a matter of taking the little bit that’s available to us now. Yes ideally I agree with you that having my own male options would be great, but for the most part they simply are not there now. And speaking of male options if a guy won’t even do something as simple as help her get hers then why may that say about his views on using his own options?
To me, a man “stepping up” regarding birth control means your #3. I want to emphasize this part of it – “getting his own contraception”. Because the man starts using birth control does not mean the woman should stop.
Please bear in mind that after the four items I listed I said “all” of that is stepping up. That third item is a major one to be sure but as you say just because he is using his options doesn’t mean that she can stop hers. So what’s wrong with making “helping her with hers” a part of that as well?
If YOU do not want a child, then YOU do what it takes to not create one. Do not expect or depend on the other person to shoulder your responsibility. Anyone who does not use birth control is ceding, whether by neglect or conscious decision, their reproduction control to their sexual partner.
Agreed. But does going out for her Plan B necessarily mean that he didn’t do anything else? Maybe he was going out to get her Plan B because they think his condom broke?
All well n good to get men to use contraceptives, but what happens when they do and pregnancy still happens?
In Ireland you have to be interviewed by a pharmacist before they sell you plan b. They check how long it’s been since you’ve taken it previously and a whole load of other risk factors to make sure it’s safe for you to take before it’s handed over.
In this situation it’d be obviously inappropriate to sell the medicine to a man, who can’t answer those questions for the person he’s buying it for. There’s also the issue that he might be buying them to dose someone against their will.
Plan B is powerful stuff and shouldn’t be available for anyone to just pick off the shelf and go. Unless there’s some reason that the woman in question literally can’t get to the pharmacy I think she should do the buying, although it’d be reasonable for the cost to be split.
It’s actually available off the shelf, here. It’s in between the condoms and the pregnancy tests. I had no problem paying for it, but I still think it should not have been solely my responsibility. He didn’t want a child as much as I don’t, and I think it’s reasonable to split the cost. Shared responsibility.
Fair enough.
I want to agree with you (mostly because I think you’re a good person)and hopefully at some point in time I will, but as long as official policy is my body my choice, I would have to disagree. If men in the future have the option to unilaterally place their children for adoption as women effectively can or are given the option of a financial abortion (both cases would essentially waive their rights and obligations to the mother or some third party if she doesn’t want the child either), I would agree that he is obligated to pay half unless he wanted the child. Of course, if he tells her he wants the child, he shouldn’t be able to later financially abort or unilaterally adopt out the child.
I’ve said before that I think men need to have options, as well, when it comes to reproductive rights. If a woman can choose to opt out of parenting, a man should be afforded the same choice (via financial abortion). There needs to be both culpability and choice for both parties.
You are too late for responsibility if you need to use ‘Plan B’?
I also heard stories of men giving it to their unsuspecting girlfriends, and they only thing the girls know about it is that they feel sick and start their period..
That’s strange, but true.
I overheard some college guys at my school bragging about how they have a ‘stockpile’ and how awesome it is to not have to use condoms..that’s pretty irresponsible and I think it should be restricted to only female purchase because of men like that.
Anybody can misuse a product, but I think that to restrict all men because of the actions of a few wouldn’t be the best solution. I don’t know what it accomplishes to say to a guy who’s just trying to be decent that he can’t participate in reproductive responsibility.
I agree completely with you, Jasmine. There are responsible men out there who find it more than fair to share the cost of birth control. Why restrict these men from taking part in something the frankly should be doing because of a number of bad apples. It doesn’t make any sense, Rite Aid.
That is absolutely horrible. Mind, that’s as horrible as men who report women lying about whether they’re using birth control or not. It’s messed up people doing messed up things.
That being said, it’s wrong to make an entire policy based on the fear that a few horrible people will do horrible things. There are totally legit reasons for men to purchase Plan B. Can’t deny all men the ability to purchase it because a few might take advantage.
You are too late for responsibility if you need to use ‘Plan B’?
Of course not. In fact I would say its an extra layer of responsibility.
As for you the misuse, yes it happens and its horrible.
I overheard some college guys at my school bragging about how they have a ‘stockpile’ and how awesome it is to not have to use condoms..that’s pretty irresponsible and I think it should be restricted to only female purchase because of men like that.
That’s unfair to say the least. As I have said already people like to piss and moan about how men aren’t taking their responsibilities in contraception seriously so you think a step in the right direction is to ban all men, including the man in this story, from buying it just because you heard some guys in college brag about misusing it?
And speaking of misuse women could misuse it too. Oh did you talk it over and decide to want a baby but she used Plan B anyway to prevent that? So should there be some sort of limitations on women buying it as well?
Either you want guys to have as many options and responsibilities as possible or you want to keep their options extremely limited. Can’t have it both ways.
Oh ew! What the fuck?
@Rachel: “I also heard stories of men giving it to their unsuspecting girlfriends, and they only thing the girls know about it is that they feel sick and start their period..
[...]
that’s pretty irresponsible and I think it should be restricted to only female purchase because of men like that.”
So, since someone uses knives for crime, we must selling knives only to professional chefs?!?
That’s absurd.
BTW, since car accidents kill thousands every year, let’s forbid driving them, unless you’re an F1 racing pilot.
The question shouldn’t be whether or not men can buy Plan B, it should be whether or not they can force their female partners to choose between 1) using Plan B (with shared cost), or 2) giving up all claims of child support obligations from the man forever.
I know *financial abortions* were already mentioned, I just wanted to stress the specific binary decision that I believe should be the real issue here.
Where this gets really tricky is when a woman believes that she’s protected well enough from pregnancy, but the ultimatum is still given.
(To be clear: the ultimatum applies only to one night of intercourse at a time, not an entire relationship.)