"Sexual and Reproductive Rights" is a decent example of a paper on sexual health issues. Although many ethical issues surround the coming of age of young men and women across society, issues relating to reproduction and sexual rights are among the most hotly contested of these. This is due to a number of reasons but first and foremost the fact that the American society continues to put forward that a “ child” is an individual that for purposes of legal guardianship and ability to vote/join the armed forces is under the age of 18. This somewhat misguided and warped view of what constitutes a child is one of the reasons that such an ongoing debate exists over whether the aforementioned “ child” should be required to tell her parents and/or receive permission prior to being able to purchase an emergency contraceptive such as Plan B. Regardless of the amount of public debate and faux morality that surround such an issue, this brief analysis will seek to analyze the underlying values and laws that provide the basis for the availability of both emergency contraceptives and abortion services within our current society. The issue itself breaks down into a question over sexual versus reproductive rights. As such, it is the firm belief of this author that the two must necessarily be considered as one and the same. If a society is willing and able to confer onto a young woman the ability to determine for herself, according to her own will, the nature and extent of her sexual experiences, they must necessarily be equally willing to confer upon the same woman the right to make the equally important decisions with respect to birth control and reproductive rights. Similarly, choosing to allow members of society with the rights to engage in sexual intercourse at a given age while at the same time restricting them from the means necessary to manage their reproductive rights is a type of cruel joke. Furthermore, with regards to the individual case which was referenced in regards to this brief write up, it is both ethically permissible and morally incumbent on both healthcare providers and facilitators within the process to provide Plan B to a woman free of any restrictions as long as she has reached the age of majority within the given jurisdiction (Gable 957). Simply penalizing her based on the fact that she does not reach a secondary standard that the federal government has put forward as a means of providing standardization among all the states is unconscionable. Likewise, the issue should not be left up to the individual health care entity or provider to determine what is morally permissible and what is not. The question instead should be concentric around the central issues. Is the girl of the legal age of consent/majority in the jurisdiction in question? If yes, then there is but one option for the healthcare provider if the girl in question requests a type of contraception, emergency contraception, or an abortion.
ReferencesGable, Lance. "Reproductive Health As A Human Right." Case Western Reserve Law Review 60.4 (2010): 957-996. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 Oct. 2012.