Woah...I have never, ever felt so lucky to live in the country I do were birth control is concerned. What I do to get my contraceptive pills -
1. Phone up surgery, book appointment with either my nurse or GP.
2. Go in for appointment, have blood pressure test and a nice chat with said nurse or GP.
3. Be handed my prescription.
4. Go to the pharmacy, hand over prescription, wait five minutes, have my contraceptives for the next six months.
5. Fees? Don't be silly, this is England!
It makes my heart hurt tremendously though, that women such as you, TrippedMetalDetector, have to be patronised in that way, and told that your husband has more choice over what you do with your uterus than you do, and then charged for contraceptives that our NHS gives away so freely that a lot of American's are like
over the ease any person, man, woman or young sexually active teen can get themselves free contraceptives. Our country virtually throw them at us, like "here, you have sex by all means, just be safe about it, let us help you out there!" *suddenly, raining condoms*
No, to be serious again and treat this issue with the decency it deserves, TMD, reading your story, how you were treated, it absolutely sickens and angers me! Total, "The man must make the decisions! Women aren't that smart, the poor little dears." OH DO ME A DAMN FAVOUR!! Susan B Anthony would spin in her grave if she could see the way women are being treated in the very homeland where she started her courageous, precious work to fight for the equal rights of women, that over one hundred years since she died, this is the state of those alleged 'rights', that women are still treated as second class citizens, and definitely second to their husbands! This is NOT acceptable! Our body, our periods, our uterus, OUR CHOICE. When we can tell a man what he can or cannot do with his testicles, then men can have a damn say over what we do or do not do to our bodies!
To move back a bit and address BeeKay, your post on the pregnant women with mental health issues giving birth in the street, you ask a very credible question there, just what those precious little ones could have suffered at the hands of their mentally unsound mother, should she have given birth alone. I shudder to think. What I want to know though, since the evidence is quite clearly there (grasping the newborn around the neck as well as the testimony of the attending officer that she was known to them) that she's not mentally capable of motherhood, why was she pregnant in the first place? Sounds to me like she needed to be under the care of (what is known over here as) a social worker or community helper, someone who pops by weekly/whenever it necessary to the particular patient to make sure they are managing, if they're deemed capable of living out in society rather than a clinic. Why were these provisions not put in place to stop this very thing, something which it seems she's not mentally fit enough to cope with, from happening? It begs the question why, if she's that unsound, was she ever left to her own devices in the first place? I can't help but think she's been failed here, that she should have been better taken care of in her illness so that this very thing didn't happen, and that two children would be placed in foster care through no fault of their own. I feel for those babies, I really do. I feel for their mother as well, because we just don't know how sick she is, but she sounds like she shouldn't be left alone, needs care in a clinic or something, especially since she's already known to police. Again, there are a lot of details we don't know, so I've had to resort to a bit of guess work, but I can't help but think all three have been failed here. I hope she gets the help she really needs, and I hope those babies go on to live a bright, hopeful, happy and safe future, whether that's with a rehabilitated mother or not.