From the article: Why Do I Need a Pap Smear to Get Birth Control Pills?
Although Pap smears are an essential part of cervical cancer prevention, some women are simply unwilling or unable to have one. This can, potentially, cause other problems for them since many doctors refuse to give out oral contraceptives without a Pap smear - even though a Pap smear is not medically necessary to receive pills. Share your stories about whether you think that such requirements are unjust, or whether this "rule" has encouraged you to be proactive about taking care of your health when you might have otherwise avoided the exam.
NOTE: To answer anonymously, log out of your account and post as a guest. Share Your Thoughts
NOTE: To answer anonymously, log out of your account and post as a guest. Share Your Thoughts
It's a screening test!
- It's always surprised me that women are expected to subject themselves to regular intimate medical scrutiny with not a peep of protest or any sort of scrutiny as to the risks and value of the test. It's sexism at it's worst. This test doesn't empower women, it enslaves them. I'm not anti-screening, just anti-bullying. We're all adults and make decisions every day - cancer screening is no different. To hold a woman's pills is low...doctor's were pillars of society...not any more. Unplanned pregnancy can have very serious consequences, medical, social & economic. I have no respect for the doctor's who take pleasure in the misuse of their authority. They deserve harsh punishment.
- —Guest Violette
Is a pap a screening test?
- I didn't realize the smear was even a screening test like PSA testing or rectal exams for prostate cancer. Cancer screening is optional whereas I have always been made to feel that paps were mandatory, like a law. No doc has ever asked me whether I want one or given me any sort of choice. They were almost an order I guess... I cannot even think what would happen if I didn't want the test, my doc would be hysterical. I got the feeling this cancer was more common than lung cancer or breast cancer because doctors talk about it so much and we've all have abnormal paps and LEEP. I don't think the rules for cancer screening tests should be different for women. Doctors should not be allowed to make the choice for us or hold BC. Are we children who can be ordered about?
- —Guest SMc
What!!!???
- I can't believe your doctors actually get away with that...it astounds me. Your feminist leaders are clearly asleep on the job. Smear tests are a cancer screening test! How can you "require" a cancer screening test before allowing a woman access to reliable birth control? What about informed consent? Wow...America is not the place I thought it was. Gloria Steinem, were are you? I don't like the word "avoid" either...that's a psychological strategy to imply no screening is the wrong decision and screening is the right decision. With screening only you can make that decision and whatever it is, it's the right decision.
- —Guest Amelia
Change the approach
- Screening has created a divide between women and their doctors. This should have been managed differently. We should have received risk information and stats that reflected the true risk of this cancer. We should know about negative biopsies and the chance of that happening to us. If every woman felt she had made her own decision about this testing, my guess is that many women would still screen but might choose an interval that was right for them. Or, no screening.... Our lives are all made up of varying degrees of risk...some of us drink alcohol, others smoke or use drugs. I saw a bit in the paper that was talking about breast screening but the same principle applies, "Choosing not to have screening is never wrong". We can all look at the same test and each of us will have a different opinion of it's worth and value to us. If this were accepted for paps, women would feel involved in the decision making and in their own healthcare. It would be your educated choice.
- —Guest Tina
Understanding woman
- I can identify with all of these sentiments. For some reason screening has been treated differently for women. It makes me nervous so many women having these awful treatments...two of my friends have already had ablative therapy and we're still in our mid 20's. I can't help but wonder whether there might be a less damaging way of dealing with this small risk. I haven't had time to read all the comments, but if we had a HPV test for men we could avoid infection in the first place. We also need more attention on prevention...limiting sexual partners, no casual sex and using condoms until you know your partners sexual history. I quizzed my BF and found he had one previous GF who was a virgin as well. If you lose track of your risk, it's harder to assess whether you may be one of the few women who owes her life to this test. I totally agree that Pills shouldn't be tied up with screening.
- —Guest Annie
Not worth the misery
- I got abnormal pap after abnormal pap from the start and had three colposcopies, punch biopsies and then a conization. They were all negative. I stopped testing then and went off BCP. I couldn't keep living like that, I was a nervous wreck and miserable. I don't think about cancer any more and look at all the great things I have in my life. I don't want to go looking for trouble or be on the lookout for cancer all the time. I want to enjoy life. I don't talk about this cancer to my friends. I've kept my decision to myself. You should be able to get BCP without paps. Its a serious thing getting pregnant and having an abortion or taking on a child you didn't plan for or want. I hope things change and doctors allow women to enjoy their lives and make their own decisions.
- —Guest GL
It's too much!
- I think American women are treated by their doctors in a humiliating way. We don't have gyn exams and our doctors don't use stirrups or ask us to undress before they see us, if we have a gyn problem. We can have pap smears when we're 30 years of age and then at 5 year intervals. We would have 5 or 6 smears all together. It is our right to accept or refuse smears. I think the pressure you all face for yearly, very invasive and comprehensive gyn exams must make life very difficult. Are you healthier for all of this scrutiny? No, I doubt it. I can understand why some of you feel angry or avoid doctors. It's TOO MUCH and doctors should relax and develop a balanced outlook. Pills should never be refused to make women have all this testing and exams. It's irrelevant for contraception. You can't force women to have screening to get the Pill, surely that is against the law. It would be in most countries.
- —Guest Daantje
I'd like a choice with cancer screening.
- I wonder what women do if they want to follow the reduced guidelines for cancer screening. Many doctors still require yearly smears or they won't refill your BC. Given the recommedations say yearly smears are not required and cause needless interventions, it concerns me greatly. (I knew this was the effect of yearly smears many years ago!) Also, the risks of mammograms; many doctors still require them yearly from age 40 if you want BC. If you don't need scripts for BC, you can look at the reduced guidelines, but women who need BC, usually have no choice. This does seem wrong and unfair to me. Why shouldn't women have a say in these things? How can they be "required" of us to get BC and when they are in direct conflict with the recommendations? Will our doctors agree to compensate us if their "requirements" lead to harmful outcomes? I think it might be time to buy some condoms. It's all becoming far too much to take, I do feel like a body with no rights.
- —Guest Pam
Stand up for yourself!
- My husband is 20 years older and we recently went to the Dr to get swine flu injections. We went in together and the Dr thought 50 was an age when my husband should do some thinking about prostate screening. The Dr went over pros and cons and my husband said he'd think it over. No pressure, all very calm and supportive. I couldn't help but compare that with my doctor's attitude and pap smears. No information, virtually demanded to have them and I know the birth control tactic only too well. I found out that prostate cancer occurs 2000% more often then cervical cancer. (11,000 women and 220,000 men) Yet men are given pros and cons and are free to do as they see fit. I tackled my Dr...who said there was no rational explanation and finally admitted it might be paternalistic feelings that still prevailed in medicine. (even though there are many female doctors now) I have asked for a pros and cons talk and I'll be doing my own research. Time to kill paternalistic attitudes!
- —Guest Hildy
Up to you
- Whether the test is reliable and the cancer is common is one thing. The thing that matters the most is respect for individual choice and opinion. Cancer screening is always voluntary. This test is not medically indicated for the use of the Pill and so it should be the woman's choice. Why should cervical cancer screening be any different to breast or prostate screening? I don't think doctors should ever use methods to pressure women to screen. This test is voluntary and I respect every woman's right to make up her own mind. Doctors should too...
- —Guest Jess
Cervical Cancer
- Used to be the leading cause of cancer deaths among women. The only reason that it's not anymore is that so many women get Pap smears. Cervical cancer is, by nature, common. It's PAP SMEARS that have made it rare.
- —I can't believe you people
Never a good screening test
- I studied health policy at Uni and this screening confused us. It didn't fit the "requirements" of a sound screening test. Screening tests are for common and serious health problems, the test must be acceptable to the subset of population and it MUST be a reliable test - enough specificity and sensitivity to correctly identify those with disease and avoid harm to the healthy pop'n. Cervical screening doesn't satisfy any of the criteria. Our Prof said women's groups had politicized the cancer. It was always an unsuitable and inappropriate mass screening test. She felt a lot of harm had been done because the smear is very unreliable and this cancer is uncommon. Lots of limited health dollars are spent trying to locate a small subset of women. Many more lives could have been saved dealing with more common cancers or other health needs. My view: no testing unless it's a common cancer and the test is accurate. I don't worry about rare cancers and won't take chances with my health.
- —Guest Jasmina
Personal space
- A doctor told me that women need to "get over" personal space issues. He said women had to accept their lives would include regular exams that might seem undignified. I should consider it part of being a woman. I asked him whether he believed women had rights. He said only foolish women put personal space ahead of their health. I think that was the day I realized many in the medical world have no respect for women. No one would say that to a man about screening or preventative exams. This is not a compulsory part of womanhood. All exams and screening are preventative and optional in nature. They are only part of being a woman if you regard them in that way. I don't and never will. I don't believe in cancer screening, there is always another side that no one talks about and always a chance of being harmed. I don't believe our bodies are so prone to disease that we need yearly exams. More women need to look into the value and risks of these exams.
- —Guest BH
This is my life
- I didn't want this ugliness in my life. Like the last poster, our doctors have never said a word to me about pelvic exams. Breast exams, our doctors have been told never to do them unless a woman is complaining of a breast problem. Research clearly showed they were ineffective and all the biopsies are a risk factor for cancer itself. My GP got a circular from the medical society warning all doctors to stop any routine exams of the breast. (if they were doing it out of habit or some other reason) I don't want screening. It's an ugly business that causes more ugly business. This cancer would have to be very common for me to bother with it. All of this would take the pleasure out of my life. Having treatment is so common too, signing up for smears means signing up for a cone biopsy or something just as bad. I've looked at the risks and am more than happy to accept them. I hate the way our bodies are not regarded as ours by some doctors(not mine) and I feel very sorry for US women.
- —Guest Lila
Lucky me!
- I'm a 51 year old woman who has never had a smear test. I work in medical research and knew screening was a long shot. The chance of it helping me was miniscule and the Australian program carries a very high risk of biopsies. (about 75-80% from memory)I did think of having them every 10 years, but looking at the numbers, it didn't seem worth the worry when it still carried a fairly high chance of biopsies. (30%) Our doctors don't do routine pelvic or breast exams. I know breast exams were done years ago, but fewer doctors do them these days because they result in biopsies and don't really help. I'd refuse a routine breast exam and a routine pelvic exam is just ridiculous - no healthy woman needs that. If you don't know the clinical value of these exams, you're not really in a position to judge whether the benefits are worth the risks. I believe the benefits are unproven or very low for all these exams and the risks well known and often quite high.
- —Guest Eve
1-15 of 43Next
