HHS, Plan B & Scientism

HHS, Plan B & Scientism by Michael Sean Winters


My response: I don't see the FDA as promoting scientism so much as professionalism, however we have civilian control of the Uniformed Public Health Service for the same reason we have civilian control of the uniformed military services. Secretary Sebelius charge is the public health, not the public morals and it is OK with me that she brought her experience as a mother and a woman to her job. There are no other implications.

She was not swayed by some Catholic Illuminati nor by the need to even things up with the Church regarding their desire for conscience protections for the bishops but not Catholics doctors, employees, patients or students. If she had been, she would have been bowing to some impulse of Christendom, where direction from the hierarchy trumps her obligation to discharge the public good using her best judgment. If she had done this for a quid pro quo to go back to the communion rail, then she would have to resign and the Papal Nuncio would have to be expelled.

I can also see the other side. If Plan B would prevent an abortion (it is not the same thing as one - life begins at gastrulation, not fertilization), then it is better than putting a 13 year old in the position of getting one or in facing parents who may prove less than understanding. There is also the possibility a relative fathered the child and the trauma of revelation adds yet more pressure - adding a risk of suicide - or that the parent is the father. Sometimes, feminists speak in the best interest of the child.

Finally, any decision the under 17 child makes as a parent is their right, not the right of their child. Allowing Plan B follows that legality.