Skip to comments.Cardinal Dolan Slams Giving Morning After Pills to 14-Year-Olds
Posted on 09/25/2012 2:08:24 PM PDT by NYer
Cardinal Dolan, the head of the U.S Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Archdiocese of New York, is slamming a program that will give morning after pills to girls in NYC schools as young as 14-years-old.
The New York City Department of Education is furnishing morning-after pills and other birth control drugs to students at 13 city high schools and without parental permission. School nurses supplied with the drugs, which can cause a very early abortion, are dispensing Plan B and other oral or injectable birth control to girls as young as 14 without telling their parents unless the parents opt out of the program after receiving a school letter informing them of the new policy.
In a blog post titled, “Tragic and Misguided,” Dolan pans the idea.
The public schools of the City of New York have announced that they are providing so-called emergency contraception and long-term contraceptive injections to high school students as young as 14 years old. This policy of dispensing of powerful medicines to young women without their parents knowledge and consent is tragic and misguided.
Parents have the right and the responsibility to be the first and primary educators of their children. This plan usurps that role, and allows the public school system to substitute its beliefs and values for those of the parents. It also places minors at risk, because no school system can be expected to know all the pertinent health information about their son or daughter, and be able to properly judge what is in their best interests. Requiring parents to opt-out of the program is hardly adequate, either. In New York State in recent weeks, laudable legislation has been passed and signed into law requiring explicit consent from parents if a child wants to get a piercing or a tattoo. We now also have a law on the books banning minors from using tanning salons even if the parents consent, out of concern for possible long term health risks. And, for every other medical procedure, explicit, informed consent is required. But not when these powerful drugs with their potentially serious side effects are involved. Then we let these young teens do what they want, without a word to their parents.
What say you Cardinal? No need for a pill unless there is pillage.
This needs to go around again and again for the next two months.
Turning them into little Sandra Flukes is so much easier than teaching them to be decent, moral young ladies. That is so passe.
Well, Cardinal Tim, tell your flock to stop voting for Democrats, and you’ll see less of this indignity.
>unless the parents opt out of the program after receiving a school letter informing them of the new policy.
If I’m reading this correctly, the parents can refuse their female child receiving this pill.
That seems backwards. Perhaps it should be given only if their parent(s) opt in?
There's your answer. Quote from Dolan's article.
If Im reading this correctly, the parents can refuse their female child receiving this pill.
Yes, if the girl gives the no-permission slip to the parent to sign, and returns it to the school. If she “forgets”, she is on the list of girls who can receive the pill.
My brain is imagining the Law Firm Ads on tv in another ten years: If you have ever received or think you have received this pill from a school nurse, please contact Slip & Fall, LLC.
Bob Dolan is right!
Strange how you could consider his statements as an endorsement of Obama. Romneybots see an enemy behind any reasoned thought.
If you're a toxic a**hole who absolutely MUST find fault in any and all things Catholic, I suppose an utterly moronic question like this would make some type of sense.
The rest of us - you know, people capable of linear thought - understand that Dolan is very much against 14 years olds (male and female) having sexual intercourse.
One of the arguments against sex before marriage was possible pregnancy and/or disease. A practical argument but not a moral one since both may be prevented with care.
So is sex before marriage primarily a moral issue or just a matter of “virtue and responsibility” that might be met by engaging in so-called “safe sex”?
If the first then males must be brought into the picture instead of telling some teenage girl, “Don't get pregnant” as if it's something she does all by herself or is solely responsible for.
If the latter then science will determine morality by how well it prevents a few of the results of immoral acts.
Dolan says, “”Abstinence before marriage is the only sure way to avoid pregnancy and disease, while also allowing minors to practice virtue and responsibility”.
The young say using reliable birth control meets his criteria without the abstinence. And since Dolan nor any other priest will penalize fornication what is he really saying except that abstinence works better than birth control (not in question).
On what basis is he making an argument against sex before marriage? Primarily the use of birth control as immoral rather than fornication as being immoral.
And it's failing.
Bring back the fire & brimstone.
We’re talking about a school district that uses a sex positive sex ed starting at 11. There is NO opt out.
They want these kids having sex and not buying soda
My thoughts, exactly, AFTR!!
Thanks for expressing the REAL problem!
Priests and pastors can no longer stand by behind their tax shelters-they need to be telling their congregations the truth.
Oh, I think it’s coming...
They would never dare in a million years to pass out such powerful and body damaging drugs to young males.
This is the real sexism.
A simple question is relevant here: should the 14 , 15, 16, or 17 yr old become pregnant and NOT take the “morning after pill” or other “emergency contraception,” will the school take “other measures to end the pregnancy?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.