The Pharmacy

A few weeks ago, I was waiting for the Chinatown bus to take me back to New York after a brief return to the homeland and popped in to a nearby drugstore to gather supplies for the trip. Walking through the aisles looking for both aloe vera and the biggest bottle of Gatorade that money could buy, I found myself in the "Family Planning" section of the store. Severely dehydrated, exhausted, and staring down a five hour bus journey, this aisle was probably the last place that I needed to be. Still, something about that sign made me feel uncomfortable. It was more than the outright silliness of labeling a section as "Family Planning", since in the District of Columbia the only contraceptive available over-the-counter is the condom. Rather, my uncomfort stemmed from the fact that the sign highlighted a dangerous naivete on the part of the pharmacy in assuming - and therefore propogating the belief - that the only people who purchase contraceptives are married couples that do not wish to have children.

I call this naivete dangerous for two primary reasons. Firstly, not only is it wrong to assume that it is only married couples who take proactive steps to ward off pregnancy, but by making that assumption you are in a sense condemning anyone that chooses to have premarital sex. Having or not having sex is a personal decision, and no outside party, least of all a corporate store, should influence that decision through shame. Unmarried people have sex. Get over it. They have done so since the dawn of time and will continue to do so well into the future. With this in mind, they will have sex in one of two ways. Either with a condom or without one. Using a condom limits the chances of unwanted pregnancy, and therefore should be used by anyone that is not ready for parenthood, regardless of marital status. The store, least of all a pharmacy whose function is to provide healthcare products, is in no position to judge its products or whoever chooses to purchase them.

Secondly, to call the section "Family Planning", the store is ignoring one of the primary functions of the condom - the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. While not 100% effective, the condom greatly reduces the risk of contracting STDs. In fact, the primary reason that the spread of HIV/AIDS has tapered off in this country is that more people are wearing condoms. AIDS has spread like wildfire throughout sub-Saharan Africa because the male population there refuses to use them. Sex is no longer a matter of procreation, but also a matter of life or death. People who are purchasing condoms are making the safe and thoughtful decision, not only for themselves but also for their partners, and their actions should be applauded, not shamed by unnecessarily tacking family values onto them.

Better levels of health and welfare will only be raised by reasonable and rational thinking. Whether or not people have sex cannot be influenced, and, in my opinion, nor should it. But it is the job of the healthcare community (of which that store is a part) to educate people on the consequences of their actions, encourage smart decisions, but certainly not to shame people whose only crime is that of protecting themselves, their partners, their health, and their future.