Stop Teen Pregnancy

Teen Pregnancy 8: Depo Shot

Long term birth control methods offer ideal contraception for teenagers. For one, they are the most effective contraception device to date. Secondly, teenagers are notoriously poor contraceptive users. Teenage women are more likely than older women to have an accidental pregnancy while using any given method of contraception. Because of the very little amount of effort required by a Depo Shot or Norplant, either an injection every three months or an hour of implantation procedures every five years, they are virtually teen-proof.

Women who use Norplant for over a year report that they like it for its effectiveness, convenience, and lack of serious side effects. This convenience is also appreciated among teenage users. Over seven out of ten (71%) teenagers using Norplant stated that they chose the contraceptive method because they would not have to remember to take pills daily, and 48% also referred to the contraceptive methods’ ease of use. Likewise from 74% to 86% of Norplant using teenagers reported being satisfied with the contraceptive method. This contrasts with the 39% reported satisfaction rate of oral contraceptive using teenagers. The ease of use and effectiveness probably accounts for the high level of satisfaction among long term synthetic hormone contraceptive users, adolescent or otherwise.

The cost over five years makes long term synthetic hormone contraception the most economical form of birth control.  For example, the average cost of oral contraceptives and doctor’s visits over five years is about $1,400. Currently Depo-Provera ( or “Depo shot“) costs $1,000 for five years of effectiveness and Norplant generally costs about between $500 to $700. However, the cost of Norplant in other countries is significantly less — always under $120, and the cost should have been substantially lowered in 1995. The actual cost to make and market the device is sixteen dollars. Because of the difference in potential cost and that most teens do not care about the convenience in reversing contraceptive methods, Norplant presently is more desirable than Depo-Provera (commonly called “Depo Shot“)for a cost-effective teenage pregnancy deterring policy.

There is an obvious argument for supplying teenagers with subsidized Norplant systems. This policy will protecting the health, welfare, and future of the teenagers. Most teens do not intend to become pregnant. Becoming pregnant subjects the mother to many health risks. Likewise, since teenage parenting generally subjects mothers to a higher risk of socioeconomic disadvantage throughout their lives, most teenagers do not want to become pregnant. Supplying teenagers with Norplant systems is a win — win situation. The state will drastically reduce the number of teenage pregnancies and consequently the costs spent on them. Teenagers will have fewer health risks, better educational opportunities, and better career options, than if they did not have access to contraception and become teenage parents.