| Course | NU680 Gynecological, Reproductive, and Sexual Health |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 9 |
| Paper type | Policy brief |
| Length | About 480 words, 4 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU680 Unit 9
The Pill on the Shelf Is Not the Whole Answer: A Unit 9 Policy Brief on Pharmacist-Prescribed Contraception
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU680: Gynecological, Reproductive, and Sexual Health
Unit 9 Policy Brief
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The state, committee and bill are composite and illustrative; the studies and figures cited are real.
The Problem
Many people who want hormonal contraception face practical obstacles to getting it: a visit to book, time off work, travel and a prescription that must be renewed. These obstacles fall hardest on people in rural counties and those with hourly jobs. Since 2024 one daily progestin-only product has been sold off the shelf, which helps, but it is a single method. Pills containing estrogen, the patch and the ring still require a prescription, and the shelf product is not always covered by insurance at the counter.
What Oregon Found
Oregon allowed pharmacists to prescribe pills and patches in 2016. Medicaid claims from the first two years show that pharmacists wrote about 10 percent of new prescriptions for these methods in the program, and nearly three in four of those patients had not had hormonal contraception in the previous month, which suggests the policy reached new users rather than only shifting existing ones (Anderson et al., 2019). Fewer than 5 percent had a diagnosis code suggesting a possible contraindication. A cost-effectiveness model built on those claims estimated that the policy averted 51 unintended pregnancies and saved Oregon Medicaid about $1.6 million over the period (Rodriguez et al., 2019). The model's main sensitivity was continuation: if patients using pharmacists stopped their method more often than patients using clinics, the benefit would disappear.
A pharmacist with a screening form reaches people that a clinic schedule does not.
Where the Profession Stands
The national obstetrics college (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG], 2019) backs over-the-counter access to hormonal contraception without age limits and calls pharmacist-provided contraception a possible intermediate step toward that goal. It also notes that pelvic and breast examinations and cervical screening are not required before starting hormonal contraception.
Objections the Committee Will Hear
Some members may worry that pharmacists will miss contraindications that a clinician would catch. The Oregon claims suggest the screening form works, with few prescriptions to patients carrying a contraindicating diagnosis. Others may worry that people will skip cervical screening; the professional guidance already separates contraception from screening, and pharmacists can refer patients for preventive care.
Recommendation
The committee should pass the bill with three safeguards. First, require a standardized self-screening questionnaire and blood pressure check based on current eligibility criteria, with referral when a contraindication appears. Second, require Medicaid and state-regulated plans to pay pharmacists for the prescribing service, since Oregon's uptake was limited where pharmacies were not paid. Third, fund an evaluation of continuation rates at two years, the factor on which the savings depend.
References
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2019). Over-the-counter access to hormonal contraception: ACOG committee opinion, number 788. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 134(4), e96-e105. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003473
Anderson, L., Hartung, D. M., Middleton, L., & Rodriguez, M. I. (2019). Pharmacist provision of hormonal contraception in the Oregon Medicaid population. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 133(6), 1231-1237. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003286
Rodriguez, M. I., Hersh, A., Anderson, L. B., Hartung, D. M., & Edelman, A. B. (2019). Association of pharmacist prescription of hormonal contraception with unintended pregnancies and Medicaid costs. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 133(6), 1238-1246. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003265
Reading the NU 680 Unit 9 instructions
The ninth unit often turns from individual patients to the policies that shape access, asking for a policy brief addressed to a named audience such as a legislator, agency or health system. Prompts typically want the problem stated with evidence, the current policy, the options, a clear recommendation and the strongest objection answered. Instructors look for briefs that report evidence honestly, including its limits, and that tie each recommendation to a finding. The format differs from a paper: short sections, plain language and a recommendation the reader can act on. Many sections ask how nurse practitioners or other clinicians are affected. Two to four pages is common, in APA format with headings such as problem, evidence, objections and recommendation. Sources are usually peer-reviewed evaluations of the policy where it already exists, plus a professional society statement.
How this NU680 Unit 9 example is built
The committee brief opens with the members' objection about the shelf pill and answers it in the problem section by naming the methods that still need a prescription. The Oregon section reports Anderson and colleagues' claims analysis, including the share of new prescriptions, the proportion of new users and the low rate of contraindications, then Rodriguez and colleagues' cost model with its weak point about continuation, which a margin note marks. A highlighted line states what pharmacists add. The professional position cites ACOG's committee opinion, including its point that examinations and screening are not prerequisites. An objections section answers concerns about missed contraindications and skipped screening. The recommendation sets three safeguards, each tied to a finding, which a second margin note highlights: a screening form with blood pressure, payment for the service and funded evaluation of continuation.
Where the points sit in the NU680 Unit 9 rubric
A brief for a legislative reader earns its marks through a clear problem statement, honest evidence, analysis of options, feasibility of the recommendation, attention to the audience and writing. Problem clarity means a reader understands in a paragraph who is affected and how. Evidence credit goes to data from places that have tried the policy, reported with its limitations rather than as a slogan. Analysis is judged on whether objections are anticipated and answered. Feasibility rewards recommendations with concrete safeguards and a way to evaluate results. Audience marks depend on plain language and a format a committee member could scan. Many rubrics also credit a link to nursing or advanced practice roles. Concise headings, correct figures and APA references for each study and statement complete the criteria. Briefs that run long or bury the recommendation lose presentation points.
NU680 Unit 9 help: mistakes that cost points
Briefs most often lose marks for arguing a position without evidence from places where the policy has operated. Another frequent weakness is reporting only favorable findings, which a skeptical reader notices. Some students write an essay rather than a brief, with long paragraphs and no recommendation until the end. Others recommend a policy without safeguards or a way to evaluate it. Confusing the nonprescription progestin-only pill with all hormonal contraception is a common factual error in this topic. Addressing the wrong audience, such as writing to patients when the prompt names a legislator, also costs points. Start by writing the recommendation in one sentence, then list the two facts a committee member would most need to support it and the strongest reason they might vote no. Send the topic, the named audience and the prompt, and a brief can be drafted around them.
Get an NU680 Unit 9 example written to your instructions
Send the policy topic, the audience your prompt names and the brief instructions with the rubric. A custom brief states the problem with data, weighs the policy and recommends steps a clinician or agency could take. It arrives within 24-48h, and the first one is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More NU680 papers and MSN samples
- NU680 Unit 1: Sexual History Discussion Post
- NU680 Unit 2: Amenorrhea Workup Paper
- NU680 Unit 3: Contraceptive Counseling Plan
- NU680 Unit 4: Infertility Evaluation Brief
- NU680 Unit 5: Seminar Reflection
- NU680 Unit 6: Genitourinary Syndrome Case Analysis
- NU680 Unit 7: Diagnostic Reasoning Paper
- NU680 Unit 8: Treatment Decision Paper
- NU680 Unit 10: Inclusive Care Plan
- MN501 Unit 9: Professional Development Plan
- NU678 Unit 9: Transition to Practice Plan, Inpatient
- MN502 Unit 9: Theoretical Framework Paper
- NU677 Unit 9: Legal Duty Brief, Firearm Threat
NU680 Unit 9 questions, answered
Who is the audience for a policy brief?
Often a legislator, an agency or a health system leader, as your prompt specifies. Write for that reader: short sections, a clear recommendation and evidence they can repeat.
Can a policy brief take a position?
Yes, a brief should recommend something, supported by evidence. Acknowledge the strongest objection and explain why your recommendation still holds.
How long is a typical policy brief?
Usually two to four pages. Headings such as problem, current policy, evidence, options and recommendation keep it scannable.
Where can I find a free NU680 Unit 9 sample paper?
The complete NU680 Unit 9 policy brief is on this page. It advises a composite state senate committee on pharmacist-prescribed contraception, using Oregon's Medicaid results and ACOG's position, and recommends passage with three safeguards.
Does the nonprescription pill make pharmacist prescribing unnecessary?
Not according to this brief. The shelf product is one progestin-only pill, while combined pills, the patch and the ring still need a prescriber, and the shelf pill is not always covered at the counter. Pharmacist prescribing fills part of that gap.