Apparently a school in Maine is offering the middle school students the CHOICE to take birth control pills. The big issue though, is that it is without parental consent. What is your beliefs on this?

I feel that it should be fine. The students are going to do it anyway, so the school is going to be a back bone. And for those who say that it supports having sex, than doesn't a health class or an anatomy class support sex, being in the way that it puts the thought in the child's head. So if it isn't right to have the OPTION, than shouldn't health class not exist? As you can tell I support it, and I am liberal... whoo...

We had a discussion in class today about this subject and there were about 6 for it (which only 3 people talked about it) and the rest of the class was against it. So we were a little outnumbered. Anyway... what do you think on the subject?

MIDDLE school??

It's time for the parents and teachers to put their heads together.

We have had this debate on the board already here : https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/politics/forget-hillary-care-what-about-school-based-health-care-142147.html


The first responsibility I think the school has upon finding out that a middle school girl is having sex is to contact family services. Too often these are cases of incest . Maine law says sex with a nonspousal minor under 14 is gross sexual assault.

The schools have no business distributing any medication to a child without parental consent . The pill has side effects, and I don't think a child of that age can be expected to make an informed decision about that.It messes with their hormones at a very dangerous stage of their development .It does nothing to prevent othe sexually active related diseases.
The state imposes the legal duty on parents to be responsible for their children's well being until they're 18 .
The parents should have the right to know about such fundamental things as what medicines and medical counseling their pre-teen children are being given.

It is a bad idea.

I heard about this. It is pathetic.

They claim that 1% of their students are sexually active, so based on that they offer it to the whole school.

It sure increases the 1%!

Where I grew up, it's a common sense that Premarital Sex is wrong! (Not religious reason)

Sex in middle school! I wish it's illegal.

Naw, let them find out about them the hard way.

It sure increases the 1%!

Where I grew up, it's a common sense that Premarital Sex is wrong! (Not religious reason)

Sex in middle school!? I wish it's illegal.
It is illegal

I don't think schools should give medication to kids without parental consent. It's a parental rights issue, a tax dollar issue, and, for many, a religious issue. Personally, I think they should provide health exams, and birth control in high school with parental consent, but not in middle school. Or they could compromise and hand out condoms and info on STD and sexual health but not birth control. I don't think 12 year olds should be having sex. If they absolutely must have this program, make parental consent a requirement.

I don't think schools should give medication to kids without parental consent. It's a parental rights issue, a tax dollar issue, and, for many, a religious issue. Personally, I think they should provide health exams, and birth control in high school with parental consent, but not in middle school. Or they could compromise and hand out condoms and info on STD and sexual health but not birth control. I don't think 12 year olds should be having sex. If they absolutely must have this program, make parental consent a requirement.
What do you expect from a state run entity? You probley don't know fingerprinting of Elementary school kids has been going on with-out parental too.

The schools do many things without the parent knowledge or approval.
They say birth control can cause blood clots and other side effects.
Wonder what the complications could be for 11 year olds and if there would be a right to sue once they find out
11 year olds bodies can not handle because?

Hello Animedude,

First of all, I thought it was illegal for schools to dispense medicines to children without parental permission. Even the family doctor can't prescribe medicines for kids unless parents have signed the appropriate forms beforehand. So how is it that the school nurse (NURSE?! ) can hand out medicines to kids?

Second, since when are public schools supposed to take the place of parents? When did I as a parent give up my rights and responsibilities for raising my children according to my family values to the school system?

Third, we are talking about Middle School here. Kids who's ages are 10-13 years old. What the hell are they doing having sex anyway? Where are their parents... and if the school system is taking responsibility for parenting them, then where is the schools system in stopping pre-teens from having sex with each other?

Fourth, I'll bet that these same schools are NOT teaching abstinence alongside their sex-ed classes. I'll bet they aren't handing out abstinence flyers along with the condoms and brth control pills. Why not? Condoms and birth control pills are 90% effective in stopping pregnancy, but abstinence is 100% effective. Why are they encouraging pre-teen sex by handing out contraception, but not encouraging anstinence by handing out flyers?

Finally, I reject the argument that "they are going to do it anyway". People used to say the same thing about kids doing drugs and kids smoking and kids drinking. But there have been major ad campaigns aimed at teens to stop them from smoking, drinking and drugging. And as a result, teen smoking is significantly down from where it was just 10 years ago, teen drinking and drunk driving has shown significant declines, and teen drug use is down as well according to most polls and medical reports. They haven't been eliminated, but they have decreased significantly as a direct result of ad campaigns targeting those kids.

So if such ad campaigns work for teen drugs, teen smoking and teen drinking, why wouldn't they work for teen sex? The fact is that nobody has tried such an ad campaign for teen sex. Why not? How do we know it wouldn't work if we never tried it? Especially when we have such clear precedents that it COULD work.

Why are we saying that "kids are going to do it anyway, so we might as well give them contraception?" Why are we satisfied with that response? Nobody ever said "kids are going to smoke anyway, so we might as well make sure they're getting low-tar, filtered cigarrettes." Nobody ever said "kids are going to do drugs anyway, so we might as well make sure they're getting pure, clean stuff without any dangerous additives." Nobody ever said "Kids are going to drink and drive anyway, so we might as well buy them all helmets." Those statements would be encouraging those activities. Instead, we try very hard to discourage teen use of drugs, alcohol and cigarrettes. So why aren't we trying just as hard to discourage teen and pre-teen sex? Why are we instead giving our de-facto approval by handing out condoms and birth control?

Elliot

Should we be educating them about sexually transmitted disease? How about we tell them that using a condom will help prevent that. What is the relative % of STD's in that school district compared to others; might'nt that influence handing out condoms and instruction on their use?

In the state I live in schools have to have parental consent to allow kids into sex ed. Giving birth control without parental consent is wrong. Childrena re under the authority of their parents and others should respect that authority by acquiring permission/ parental consent. Children are not adults and are not granted the same rights as adults.

DC,

Should sex ed include a section on abstinence? I don't have a problem with sex ed, per se, as long as abstinence is taught alongside how to use condoms. It should be taught as the BEST, MOST EFFECTIVE method of avoiding pregnancy and STDs. Don't you agree that the option of abstinence ought to be part of an overall sex ed program?

But I draw the line at schools handing out drugs of any kind without parental consent. And especially when those drugs are birth control being handed out to pre-teens. We are talking about middle school kids here, DC. Not even high-schoolers.

Elliot

It's my understanding the kids who are seen by the clinic have been given parental permission to be seen without a parent and be treated without a parent. I'm not sure how they are getting away with that, but that's what I read somewhere (sorry, don't remember where). So, by signing the permission slip to let your child be seen, you've signed a permission slip for you child to be prescribed anything/everything with no parental approval. I think this is a lawsuit waiting to happen - all it will take is one girl on the pill to have a blood clot (not likely, but it does happen). I would be A-OK with this whole mess if it only required parental consent before giving the child medications except in a medical emergency.


nicespringgirl agrees: I know! I just can't stand on premartial sex! BC pills make women fat

A side effect for SOME women is weight gain while on the pill. I've been on it for seven years and have gained three pounds total. Beyond that, adolescent girls should not be overly concerned with weight gain and making such statements as "make women fat" teaches young (and old) women that gaining a little bit of weight is the worst thing to happen. Birth control is effective, generally quite safe, and generally has few side effects. Weight gain is the last thing that should be on your mind if you are on the pill given the other benefits it provides. Gaining a few pounds does not equate with the end of the world.

Gaining a few pounds does not equate with the end of the world.

Yeah... I've heard lots of fat women say that.:eek:

Just kidding.:D

Elliot

DC,

Should sex ed include a section on abstinence? I don't have a problem with sex ed, per se, as long as abstinence is taught alongside how to use condoms. It should be taught as the BEST, MOST EFFECTIVE method of avoiding pregnancy and STDs. Don't you agree that the option of abstinence ought to be part of an overall sex ed program?

But I draw the line at schools handing out drugs of any kind without parental consent. And especially when those drugs are birth control being handed out to pre-teens. We are talking about middle school kids here, DC. Not even high-schoolers.

Elliot
The teaching of abstinence is first and foremost an essential and the only universal that should be taught. However, some school districts have ‘special problems’ relative to other school districts and the same solution to sexual education is not going to work universally. My concern is that school districts where pregnancy and sexual disease is extremely high- where many parents themselves are drug addicts or alcoholics- is held to the moral standard of middle class America.

The problem right now, DC, is that abstinance is NOT being taught as part of sex ed. In a few districts it has actually been made illegal to do so. And in those where it is legal, they brush it off as something that won't really work.

I have a problem with that. Don't you?

Elliot

tomder55 agrees: Do you have studies on the safe usage of birth control by pre-teens ? I think we are in unchartered waters here. It would seem to me that messing with hormones at this stage of development has to be risky.

Nope, I don't, and I'm not advocating the reckless distribution of the pill to pre-teen girls. I'm saying IF it is going to be handed out (or any other prescription drug) by the school, the parent or legal guardian should be required to give permission specific to that instance. Not a blanket consent form, but consent specific to the medication and or treatment provided. I don't know what effect hormones have on girls that age, but I'd like to think the doctors aren't handing it out without having done studies. If they haven't, I don't see how the legislation was passed and it would be highly unethical for a doctor to prescribe medication to his/her patient when it is not approved for use for an individual of that age. Nothing I have read about the pill mentions an age limit, however. Young teens can be placed on the pill for reasons aside from protecting against pregnancy (regulation of menstrual cycle, shorter, lighter cycle, eases crapms, helps to prevent cancer, helps to treat acne, PCOS, PID and anemia); there are a lot of health benefits in taking the pill.


Yeah... I've heard lots of fat women say that.

Me too. I've heard skinny women say it too. I'm one of the latter. I like to PROMOTE self-confidence and acceptance, not hinder it. :)

On teaching abstinence, it should be part of the lesson plan, but it should be taught along with other methods for protection. Many abstinence only programs are not medically accurate (telling kids they can get pregnant by touching genitals) and do not teach kids about other prevention methods at all. This is very dangerous, as these kids will grow up and not know anything about sex or their bodies. Kids are already mis-informed about sex; parents don't talk about it, and schools should be a source of accurate, truthful information. I remember seeing a post on this site by a girl wondering if she was pregnant because she hadn't had her period in 30 days. She also hadn't had sex. In other words, this girl was so misinformed about how her natural cycle works and how people get pregnant, she was literally worried over nothing. Knowledge is power! :)

Me too. I've heard skinny women say it too. I'm one of the latter. I like to PROMOTE self-confidence and acceptance, not hinder it. :)

I know this is off topic, but has it ever occurred to those who are so concerned with the self-confidence of young girls that if they are healthy, rather than fat, they will likely have more self-confidence? And that perhaps helping a fat person (one who is able to change that state, not someone with a medical condition) become self-confident despite their weight is likely to encourage them to remain fat and unhealthy? It kind of takes the whole idea of being responsible for your own health and your own self confidence out of the picture. In essence, it rewards people who are living unhealthy lifestyles.

I won't even talk about the self-confidence issues that come with having pre-teen and young teen sex. If we are so concerned with the mental health of young girls, we ought to be doing everything we can to prevent them from having sex at such young ages, not encouraging it by handing out condoms and birth control pills.


On teaching abstinence, it should be part of the lesson plan, but it should be taught along with other methods for protection. Many abstinence only programs are not medically accurate (telling kids they can get pregnant by touching genitals) and do not teach kids about other prevention methods at all. This is very dangerous, as these kids will grow up and not know anything about sex or their bodies. Kids are already mis-informed about sex; parents don't talk about it, and schools should be a source of accurate, truthful information. I remember seeing a post on this site by a girl wondering if she was pregnant because she hadn't had her period in 30 days. She also hadn't had sex. In other words, this girl was so misinformed about how her natural cycle works and how people get pregnant, she was literally worried over nothing. Knowledge is power! :)

No question. Knowledge is power. But what do you call truth?

It is definitely true that sex is fun and feels good. It is true that sex can make a couple very happy. It is also true that one can have sex with condoms and birth control and avoid the consequences of their actions, ei: disease and pregnancy. And finally, it is true that if these fail, there's always abortion to fall back on. All true. But is that the truth that we want 10-13 year old girls to know?

Or do we want them to know the truth that 10-13 year olds should not be having sex, that it is bad for their mental and physical health to have sex so young, that it forever changes a person to have sex, that sex, even protected sex, is not without risk, and that disease can result from sexual activity?

I'd prefer that kids that young get the latter version of the truth. Along with my moral/religious teachings, of course.

As a side note, I was a virgin on my wedding night at the age of 29, and so was my wife at 27. It CAN be done, and in fact, in our religious community, it is the norm. Pre-marital sex is the exception to the rule in the Orthodox Jewish community, and that is the result of an ongoing cooperation between teachers, parents and religious leaders to spread the word about abstinance to the youth of our community. It is an ongoing campaign to teach abstinence to kids, and it works to stem the tide of ALL pre-marital sex in the community, not just teen and pre-teen sex. It is not 100% effective, but it is a lot more successful than the public school system is at preventing teen sex. And it is virtually 100% effective at preventing teen pregnancy and STDs in the Orthodox Jewish community.

And by the way, I can guarantee that Orthodox Jewish kids know as much about the biology and physiology of reproduction and about adolescent changes in human physiology as any kid who has taken sex ed in a public high school. Probably more. They are living in the real world and come about their early sexual knowledge in the same ways as other kids do... from peers. They are not deprived of knowledge about sexuality because they have been taught and practice abstinance as a way of life.

So I don't really buy the idea that kids need to be taught how to have sex safely in order to keep from being confused about their bodies. There are whole communities out there that practice sexual abstinance before marriage and still seem to be well educated on the subject.

Elliot

What is your criteria for allowing freedom to a person to choose for themselves?

No question. Knowledge is power. But what do you call truth?

It is definitely true that sex is fun and feels good. It is true that sex can make a couple very happy. It is also true that one can have sex with condoms and birth control and avoid the consequences of their actions, ei: disease and pregnancy. And finally, it is true that if these fail, there's always abortion to fall back on. All true. But is that the truth that we want 10-13 year old girls to know?

Or do we want them to know the truth that 10-13 year olds should not be having sex, that it is bad for their mental and physical health to have sex so young, that it forever changes a person to have sex, that sex, even protected sex, is not without risk, and that disease can result from sexual activity?

I'd prefer that kids that young get the latter version of the truth. Along with my moral/religious teachings, of course.

Elliot

How about someone under 18 years old should not be having sex because it is bad for their mental health and possibly bad for their physical health. Tell them what the laws are in their state; what is illegal. That sex, even protected sex, is not without risk, and that disease can result from sexual activity even with a condom. However when you are older and finally decide to have sex use a condom and birth control and should both those methods fail you remember that the morning after pill is available. Talk about STDs how you get them and what STDs a condom helps guard against and which ones it doesn't help guard against. Talk about abortion with facts and figure stress that it is a woman's right what she does with her body but at the same time stress that it's one of the last things that you want to put your body through. Talk about other options instead of abortion, adoption and what is the process for that. Talk about what happens if decide to keep the child. Talk about groups that can help. Give them more knowledge until they just don't want to hear anymore about it.

I know this is off topic, but has it ever occurred to those who are so concerned with the self-confidence of young girls that if they are healthy, rather than fat, they will likely have more self-confidence? And that perhaps helping a fat person (one who is able to change that state, not someone with a medical condition) become self-confident despite their weight is likely to encourage them to remain fat and unhealthy? It kind of takes the whole idea of being responsible for your own health and your own self confidence out of the picture. In essence, it rewards people who are living unhealthy lifestyles.

I won't even talk about the self-confidence issues that come with having pre-teen and young teen sex. If we are so concerned with the mental health of young girls, we ought to be doing everything we can to prevent them from having sex at such young ages, not encouraging it by handing out condoms and birth control pills.

It is getting off topic, but there is a big difference teaching girls and boys about healthy lifestyles and calling them "fat". Insulting someone about their weight doesn't motivate them to change, instead, you teach them to love themselves and treat their bodies with respect by putting good things into it. And for the record, I agree 100% that we should be teaching young girls to not have sex at a young age; it can have more than just physical effects that last long into their adult life.




No question. Knowledge is power. But what do you call truth?

It is definitely true that sex is fun and feels good. It is true that sex can make a couple very happy. It is also true that one can have sex with condoms and birth control and avoid the consequences of their actions, ei: disease and pregnancy. And finally, it is true that if these fail, there's always abortion to fall back on. All true. But is that the truth that we want 10-13 year old girls to know?

Or do we want them to know the truth that 10-13 year olds should not be having sex, that it is bad for their mental and physical health to have sex so young, that it forever changes a person to have sex, that sex, even protected sex, is not without risk, and that disease can result from sexual activity?

I'd prefer that kids that young get the latter version of the truth. Along with my moral/religious teachings, of course.

As a side note, I was a virgin on my wedding night at the age of 29, and so was my wife at 27. It CAN be done, and in fact, in our religious community, it is the norm. Pre-marital sex is the exception to the rule in the Orthodox Jewish community, and that is the result of an ongoing cooperation between teachers, parents and religious leaders to spread the word about abstinance to the youth of our community. It is an ongoing campaign to teach abstinence to kids, and it works to stem the tide of ALL pre-marital sex in the community, not just teen and pre-teen sex. It is not 100% effective, but it is a lot more successful than the public school system is at preventing teen sex. And it is virtually 100% effective at preventing teen pregnancy and STDs in the Orthodox Jewish community.

And by the way, I can guarantee that Orthodox Jewish kids know as much about the biology and physiology of reproduction and about adolescent changes in human physiology as any kid who has taken sex ed in a public high school. Probably more. They are living in the real world and come about their early sexual knowledge in the same ways as other kids do... from peers. They are not deprived of knowledge about sexuality because they have been taught and practice abstinance as a way of life.

So I don't really buy the idea that kids need to be taught how to have sex safely in order to keep from being confused about their bodies. There are whole communities out there that practice sexual abstinance before marriage and still seem to be well educated on the subject.

Elliot

I think sex ed programs should be age appropriate. An instructor should not stand before a group of school kids of ANY age and tell them how great sex is; they should stick to medical data. When kids are young, teach them about human anatomy as they get older, their sexual organs, as they get older, what sex is, the consequences it can have, and so on. So the "truth" to me, is to provide the kids with factual information; REAL STD statistics, REAL teen pregnancy rates, REAL failure rates of condoms and the pill, all the while reinforcing that if you simply don't "do it" NONE of that stuff will happen to you. To me, kids that age who are having sex or who plan to have sex are going to find out it feels good; but the ones who are on the fence about it might be swayed by an authority figure telling them how great it is. So leave that part out. My teachers never mentioned it. As far as 12 - 13 year olds, in my opinion they should be taught about their sexual organs, what sex is, and what the consequences are if they have sex at this young age. Instructors at that age should rely mostly on reasons NOT to do it, things to do instead of having sex, and reinforce that they have their whole adult lives to be sexually active, enjoy life without it, as it can complicate things especially at such young ages.

Congrats to you for waiting until marriage; I know one couple who did the same, so yes, it can be done. I think you've hit the nail on the head when you mention the Jewish community, the parents and the teachers being involved in sex education and reinforcing that waiting is best. Kids learn from example; it's hard for a young girl who's mom sleeps around her older siblings sleep around, and her school provides her with mis-information to make the decision to not have sex. But you also mention that the kids in your community know about biology and physiology, so it's fair to assume your community isn't telling teens that HIV is spread via sweat and tears (which some "abstinence only" programs claim)? That's the difference - the teens in your community are given accurate, factual information, with a strong emphasis on how important it is to wait. The reason I think kids need to be taught about safe sex to avoid confusion about their bodies is because so many kids out there don't have a strong community backing, or active parents. In many households sex is something you simply don't talk about. So if the school only teaches abstinence, with no information about prevention methods, and a teen has sex anyway, they are ill-equipped to make that decision. You have to know what a condom is in order to use it; you have to know the pull out method is HIGHLY unreliable in order to NOT use it. Kids and their peers put out all sort of bad information, and since many parents won't teach their kids about sex, the schools have to, and they should go about it factually and with cold, clinical detail, so it doesn't come across as being this wonderful passionate thing that you should go do behind the bleachers.

For the record, my school taught abstinence and prevention methods. We were told abstinence is the only way to prevent pregnancy and STDs, and that while condoms prevent most STD's, they don't prevent all. Then they showed us pictures and went into detail about the diseases you can get even if you do use a condom. There was heavy influence in my class about STDs, how they are painful, embarrassing, and some are incurable. We were taught that condoms are good, but not perfect, and the pill only prevents pregnancy, not infection, and only pregnancy if you take it correctly. We were not given lessons on how to perform oral sex, anal sex, or any sort of sexual positions. We were not told that sex is great, we were told that at our ages it can cause a lot of problems and there are alternatives to having sex when you are in a relationship. I remember clearly the teacher saying that statistically she knows some of us in the room (about 30 kids) have had sex, but most have not. She said for those who have, this is info you need to know if you are going to continue to have sex, but it's never too late to tell your boyfriend or girlfriend you don't want to do it anymore. My school also had a "baby think it over" I think it was called; it was an electronic doll that behaves in similar fashion to a real baby. It cries and needs to be soothed, it's head must be supported, it must be "fed". There is a computer which tracks how long the baby cried, if it was shaken, if it was neglected and so on. A girl in one of my classes as a freshman talked about how badly she wanted a baby; the teacher let her take this "baby" home for a weekend. She came back on Monday and said she was never having kids! :) More schools need those dolls...

Jillian,

I have seen similar things to the dolls as you describe. I have also seen schools give kids a "pregnancy belt" to simulate what it's like to carry around the weight of pregnancy on your stomach. Kids had to wear that over a weekend to simulate pregnancy. (In one case, it was given to a group of guys as an experiment to highten their sensitivity for what women have to go through in life. :) That must have been some experiment.)

I think it's a great idea. I think that letting the kids understand the consequences of their actions makes them more responsible and better educated and less likely to do something incredibly stupid. I'd love to see those dolls become a regular part of a 9th-grade sex-ed curriculum.

Elliot

ETW, I forgot about the pregnancy belt, those are a good idea too. I agree that the dolls should be present in every school, and making them a part of the sex-ed program isn't a bad idea. I bet you'd change a lot of kids' minds just from letting them take the baby home overnight...

My senior year I took sociology; we were required to carry a 10lb sack of flour around for an entire week, sharing our duties with our "spouse" (we also had to plan our weddings). It sort of drives the point home about always having something to lug around, but it doesn't cry, poop or eat. Still was a big pain in the rear though...

You can't just teach a student just abstinence. I mean there was a study in Africa done about this and all the did was teach their students abstinence and the rate of teen pregnancy, and spread of HIV/AIDS rose. So apparently JUST teaching them abstinence doesn't work. Also, the sex-ed classes don't work, but its not like they are promoting sex. They are installing that STDs are probably going to be in your future if you don't have safe sex or no sex at all. The whole point of sex-ed is to install health sexual habits, whether you're having sex or not.

Now to get back to the actual topic, I've heard that the student has to have parental consent to get into the place where the pills are being given. It is the parents duty to know what is in the place, so that they can give consent or not. And anyway its not like the student is going to get the parent's signature anyway. Most likely the student will forget about it, and then just forge their parent's sign. Which is basically giving the student the rite to have the pill without parental consent. Is it not?

Dr Ernest Rietzschel (Ghent University, Belgium) reported the findings at the American Heart Association (AHA) 2007 Scientific Sessions last week

Otherwise healthy young women who are past users of OCs have a 20% to 30% increased risk for carotid or femoral atherosclerosis vs women who have never used OCs. The investigators suggest that women should avoid using OCs for longer than needed and that clinicians should educate women using OCs about cardiovascular risk.

Has anyone looked at the potential side effects of oral contraceptives
For example
Ortho-Novum side effects (Norethindrone and Ethinyl Estradiol) and drug interactions - prescription drugs and medications at RxList (http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/norestoc_ad.htm)
Thrombophlebitis
Arterial thromboembolism
Pulmonary embolism
Myocardial infarction
Cerebral hemorrhage
Cerebral thrombosis
Hypertension
Gallbladder disease
Hepatic adenomas, carcinomas or benign liver tumors



This is a medical issue, not a school issue. Therefore it requires parental consent.


How is it that girls and young women are put at potential harm, and same age boys are not?



I remember it the mid eighties when airbags were mandated. They made intuitive sense.
A couple of years later small people [ women and children primarily ] were being killed or maimed by them. Now we have the warnings.


Birth control at this young age may "make sense " to some people, but lets look at all the potential consequences.

I am from Maine - moved to CT at the beginning of 2007.

I am on the fense on this one. I am all for the entire thought behind it and the reasoning. We were one of the first schools to hand out condoms. Unfortunately, many parents do not talk to their kids about sex. Because of teen-sex we opened a childcare center in the school that was run by a teacher and the students - it became an actual class where students would watch the babies for a period and each period brought a new group of kids to watch the babies - under the supervision of the teacher of course. It was a wonderful program that allowed the mothers to still attend high school. I am all for protecting these kids against pregnancies and diseases.

The only problem I see is dealing with the whole hormonal thing. I am a PCOS educator and developed PCOS at the age of 8. Birth control hormones are not healthy for prediabetics. While it may induce menstrual it puts the user at more risk factors with insulin issues, cysts, etc. The other thing is that using these hormones at young ages can interfere with natural growth. So for these reasons I say no.

But the staggaring truth is, kids are having sex younger and younger. The average age is 9 and does not necessarily indicate abuse. Sadly, we as a society have become so anesthetized to sex - its in our commercials, TV shows, movies, video games, conversations, magazines, books - name it. It's no wonder more and more people, including kids, are having casual sex or experimenting - in fact many kids, in fear of pregnancy, will perform pre-sex, not believing that they are at risk of STD's regardless of vaginal/penal connection. Blame society, not just the parents for lack of education. Sex is unavoidable. A child would have to live in a world without a TV, radio or literature to get away from the sexual influences of our society. It's really quite a shame.

Angi Ingalls
PCOS in ConnecTion (http://angiingalls.com)
[email protected]

Several other issues, 1. use and not use of birth control is also a religoius issue, so by giving them out and recommending their use do they cross the line of teaching against a religioius belief, crossing the line of church and state.

Since some religious groups teach against their use, does the use of tax payer dollars used to give them to kids violate the rights of the people who do not support their use. Could these pills be privately funded.

What is the schools liablity for giving prescription medication to a minor child, can the parent ( legal guardian) hold the school liable for any medical side effects these can cause.

Religion; unless educating about different religions; does not belong in public school. If a parent is concerned about what is being taught to their child they do not wish their child to learn, there are options for them - private school, homeschooling programs, etc. But just because a set of parents are against it for religious reasons does not make it fair to those that are not religious or who are open. It is a public school and issues should be to accommodate all, it doesn't mean everyone has to participate.

I am not a lawyer but I am willing to be Yes, a parent can hold a school liable if something should go wrong. I am sure this will be evident in the near future and we will see lawsuits on this. If you can sue a doctor for malpractice, imagine what you can do to a school nurse who perscribes birth control hormones to a child.

My answer for a lot of problems? I think every parent should have to complete so-many hours of Parenting Classes per child. It would help our society so much including discovering abuse in the process. I see no downside to this idea. Imagine all the good it would do.

Angi Ingalls
PCOS in ConnecTion (http://angiingalls.com)
[email protected]

Yes, but the schools ( if the post is even right, did not care to check) the schools are doing this without telling or asking the parents. Also not all parents have an option to private school or home schoolng a working family where mom and dad both have to work ( home schooling only works when only one parent words) or one parent familys.

But the schools to give them out should require the parents permission, and unless the family are below certain income levels the parents and/or the parents insurace should have to pay for it.

Apparently a school in Maine is offering the middle school students the CHOICE to take birth control pills. The big issue though, is that it is without parental consent. What is your beliefs on this? Anyways...what do you think on the subject?

As a parent, I know that if a middle school child is being provided birth control pills and it's my child, there are two misjudgement issues to be sorted out. One involves my own accountability and responsibilities as the parent, and the second involves the school that shall be hearing from my lawyer.




Bobby

yes, but the schools ( if the post is even right, did not care to check) the schools are doing this without telling or asking the parents. Also not all parents have an option to private school or home schoolng a working family where mom and dad both have to work ( home schooling only works when only one parent words) or one parent familys.

But the schools to give them out should require the parents permission, and unless the family are below certain income levels the parents and/or the parents insurace should ahve to pay for it.

The pill is being distributed through a clinic (not the school nurse) the parent has authorized to treat their child, and the child must undergo a medical exam prior to receiving the prescription, just like at a regular doctor's office. So kids can't just walk in an grab a pack of pills from a bowl on the table in the nurse's station; there is a prescription and process for obtaining it.

So the parent says, "Yes, my child can be treated by the clinic" and then the child can get the pill without the parent's knowledge. So private school or home school wouldn't have to be necessary to make sure your kid doesn't have access to the pill - just don't sign the clinic treatment form.

I'm not sure where the funding comes from for the clinic, but I doubt it comes from the school budget. It might be a county supported thing (like a regular county clinic) or it might be a private institution contracted for space with the school. There's more info about all of this in an article I posted in a similar thread... not sure where it is though!

Here's the article I mentioned, for anyone who wants to read it:

FOXNews.com - School Board Approves Birth Control Prescriptions at Maine Middle School - Health News | Current Health News | Medical News (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303058,00.html)


At King Middle School, birth control prescriptions will be given after a student undergoes a physical exam by a physician or nurse practitioner, said Lisa Belanger, who oversees Portland's student health centers.

Students treated at the centers must first get written parental permission, but under state law such treatment is confidential, and students decide for themselves whether to tell their parents about the services they receive.

Five of the 134 students who visited King's health center during the 2006-07 school year reported having sexual intercourse, said Amanda Rowe, lead nurse in Portland's school health centers.