There are two classes of policies we could adopt to implement a ‘Norplant
for Teens’ policy. The first would make Norplant implants mandatory
for all female teenagers. This blanket policy would be the most effective,
for no teenager could fall through the cracks. The number of teenage pregnancies
would be directly related to the failure rate of Norplant systems, i.e.,
0.5%. This can reduce the number of accidental pregnancies by over a factor
of one hundred.
A critical problem with a mandatory ‘Norplant for Teens’ public
policy is that it infringes on several recognized constitutional rights.
First, since some religions object to birth control, a mandatory Norplant
policy would violate those citizens’ right to religious freedom.
Second, the Supreme Court recognizes that the Constitution implies rights
that “promise that a certain private sphere of individual liberty
will be kept largely beyond the reach of the government”. These
rights protect the ability to make particular decisions that are considered
fundamental for preserving ‘autonomy’ and ‘individual
dignity’. Decisions about procreation, contraception, and marriage
have all been recognized as protected by these rights. A mandatory Norplant
policy directly conflicts with these rights. Finally, for over two hundred
years, any medical treatment performed without consent, unless in emergency
cases, has been considered battery by Anglo-American law. As mentioned
earlier, Norplant is a drug and its insertion is a medical procedure.
To not allow individuals to refuse this ‘treatment’ would
violate the long recognized and protected right to self-determination.
This right protects individuals from “severe” intrusions of
their “personal privacy and bodily integrity”.
Second, because the government would have to supply Norplant systems to
every female teenager, the policy would not be cost-effective. There are
just too many teenagers and Norplant is too costly for the economic argument
to apply. Putting costs aside, making Norplant mandatory for teenagers
completely disregards that Norplant is a drug — levonorgestrel.
It has particular health risks and is not safe for everyone. In the previous
section I reviewed a considerable amount of side effects that individuals
may not want. Furthermore, evidence determining whether or not synthetic
hormone contraception causes or increases chances of breast cancer is
still inconclusive. This is particularly true of Norplant, since it is
a relatively recent drug. Likewise, few comprehensive studies exist that
investigates the effect Norplant has on teenagers. Forcing female teenagers
nationwide to get Norplant systems may be invoking serious health risks.
The only way to avoid violating all the aforementioned rights and to remain
cost-effective is by offering, not mandating, Norplant to consenting teenagers.
|