Essentially, Norplant is about ? the size of a ?book? of American match sticks; it is inserted by a gynecologist in the upper, inner arm of a woman who has not yet entered menopause. Once on place, it will prevent all contraception / pregnancy by the particular woman/ patient. It is effective for 18 months; then a new Norplant must be inserted; the old Norplant need not be removed, but should be. It is nearly foolproof for 18 months; it will not prevent AIDs nor any venereal disease.
Food for thought? Why? Would it not clearly improve the lot of the common DR, primarily but not exclusively young females, in the 21st century if:
a. Norplant was inserted by a gynecologist in the arm of every 14 year old girl upon attaining 14; then a new 1 implanted in 18 months, etc.; until age 25.
b. Why would she do it / want it? Each such young girl would receive 1,000 pesos, tax free when a new Norplant was inserted.
c. The mother of each such young girl / Norplant patient would receive 2,000 Pesos each time her daughter received a Norplant. Her father? Zero!
d. Would this reduce, perhaps eliminate unwanted pregnancies among the very young? Meaning those girls being less than 21 years old. Obviously, Yes!
e. Undesirable side effects? Possible? Yes. Probable? Difficult to predict. Certainly possible. Has the ?law of unintended consequences? been adopted by the DR Congress? Yes! A century ago. Perhaps 2.
f. F. Would the medical profession approve? Would the Roman Catholic Church approve?
g. Should not UNESCO, USAID, the DR government, or some such finance such a project? Perhaps with the endorsement of DR1?
Food for thought?
Food for thought? Why? Would it not clearly improve the lot of the common DR, primarily but not exclusively young females, in the 21st century if:
a. Norplant was inserted by a gynecologist in the arm of every 14 year old girl upon attaining 14; then a new 1 implanted in 18 months, etc.; until age 25.
b. Why would she do it / want it? Each such young girl would receive 1,000 pesos, tax free when a new Norplant was inserted.
c. The mother of each such young girl / Norplant patient would receive 2,000 Pesos each time her daughter received a Norplant. Her father? Zero!
d. Would this reduce, perhaps eliminate unwanted pregnancies among the very young? Meaning those girls being less than 21 years old. Obviously, Yes!
e. Undesirable side effects? Possible? Yes. Probable? Difficult to predict. Certainly possible. Has the ?law of unintended consequences? been adopted by the DR Congress? Yes! A century ago. Perhaps 2.
f. F. Would the medical profession approve? Would the Roman Catholic Church approve?
g. Should not UNESCO, USAID, the DR government, or some such finance such a project? Perhaps with the endorsement of DR1?
Food for thought?
