I think this is a good step given the climate on women’s reproductive health currently. I am apprehensive that it will be treated as a “lazy” contraceptive instead of getting combo OCPs and follow up with a physician. This type of drug is extremely narrow in dosing, in that you can get pregnant if you miss your dose by an hour or two. It also opens up the opportunity for a woman to taken it without needing a doctor, which is good for those who don’t have east access to a family doc or OB. However, given the stats in the article(that most women prefer OTC due to convenience), I think it further enables people to avoid developing a relationship with a physician for primary and preventative care. I worry we might see some accidental pregnancies and maybe some negative health outcomes secondary to people not seeing a doctor every so often for their birth control.

[–] middlemuddle 4 points 1 year ago

While I support encouraging people to have regular visits with a doctor for preventative care, I don't feel that gatekeeping birth control is the right way to do it.

Public health messaging about the importance of preventative care is important, but the barrier for most is going to be access and affordability. Most people don't have good flexibility in their lives to fit in a doctor's appointment during regular clinic hours. The availability of off hours appointment times is extremely limited. Incentives for clinics to stay open later would help to address this barrier, but there are plenty of other logistical barriers that exist which also need to be addressed. I just don't think holding birth control hostage is the right answer.