Ask Me Help Desk - Contraception in schools

As I have said before, I think that we are forgetting the ability of adults to influence children in a positive way through education.

Over the past several years, we have seen educational efforts regarding smoking pay off. Fewer kids are smoking, thanks to education and ad campaigns.

Over the past several years, we have seen educational efforts regarding drugs pay off. Fewer kids are doing drugs of any kind, thanks to education and ad campaigns.

Over the past several years, we have seen educational efforts regarding drinking and driving pay off. Fewer kids are getting behind the wheel after drinking, thanks to education and ad campaigns.

These were once areas where we were SURE that we could have no impact on our kids. And yet we have seen these efforts pay off.

So, to those who say that educational efforts regarding abstension will not work, I point out these cases where such educational efforts DID work.

There are those who want to see abstension-only education in schools. Those who are against it ague that it won't prevent kids from having sex. But neither is giving them BC or condoms. In fact, you are practically ensuring that they WILL have sex if you hand them condoms and BC without educating them on abstension as an alternative. And the one thing that giving out condoms and BC is schools has NOT done is lower the incidence of teen pregnancy. So the argument that we need to give our kids contraception in schools in order to prevent them from getting pregnant is proving to be untrue. It isn't preventing any such thing. But it is giving kids the impression that having sex is okay.

On the other hand, abstinence education worked very well during the years prior to 1960... the incidence of teen pregnancy was nil, and nobody complained. On the other hand, times were different... kids didn't know as much as they do now. So the equation might not be the same as it was 40-50 years ago.

So... what do we have here.

- We have something which has not been tried in 40 years: abstinence education. It has not been tried because people argue that it wouldn't work, despite the fact that similar efforts in different areas have worked, and despite the fact that abstinence educatuion did work prior to 1960.

- We have something which has been proven not to work that is still being pushed as the most effective means of controlling teen pregnancy: contraception in schools. It has been argued as the best way to stop teen pregnancy, despite the fact that there has been no decrease in teen pregnancy.

So, if what we are doing now isn't working, why aren't we willing to try something else that has a good chance of working in the long term? If school contraception isn't working, why aren't we willing to teach abstinence?

Elliot

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

There are those who want to see abstension-only education in schools. Those who are against it ague that it won't prevent kids from having sex. But neither is giving them BC or condoms. In fact, you are practicaly ensuring that they WILL have sex if you hand them condoms and BC without educating them on abstension as an alternative. And the one thing that giving out condoms and BC is schools has NOT done is lower the incidence of teen pregnancy. So the argument that we need to give our kids contraception in schools in order to prevent them from getting pregnant is proving to be untrue. It isn't preventing any such thing. But it is giving kids the impression that having sex is okay.

In my opinion, teaching abstinence isn't the problem - teaching the current abstinence only program which is full of factually incorrect information and doesn't discuss contraceptives at all is the problem. That just means the kids who DO decide to have sex have no clue at how to prevent pregnancy or infection. We can't expect teens to grow into adulthood and be able to make informed decisions if we lie to them to keep their pants on when they're kids. Uninformed teens = uninformed adults, and well... there are enough of those already! :D

If there were a program which focused on abstinence first, but also provided factual information about contraceptives, STDs, abortion, teen pregnancy and so on, I'd be all for it. I think that what people forget is that teens grow into adults, and while it might be nice for everyone to wait until marriage, that's just not the case for most. So if two un-married 30-somethings decide to have sex, it's important they too know the risks and prevention methods. Personally, I'm more concerned with preventing teens from having sex than preventing consenting adults; so maybe I advocate "abstinence until adulthood". I don't know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

As I have said before, I think that we are forgetting the ability of adults to influence children in a positive way through education...

So, to those who say that educational efforts regarding abstension will not work, I point out these cases where such educational efforts DID work.

Amen, brother.

Quote:

There are those who want to see abstension-only education in schools. Those who are against it ague that it won't prevent kids from having sex. But neither is giving them BC or condoms. In fact, you are practically ensuring that they WILL have sex if you hand them condoms and BC without educating them on abstension as an alternative. And the one thing that giving out condoms and BC is schools has NOT done is lower the incidence of teen pregnancy. So the argument that we need to give our kids contraception in schools in order to prevent them from getting pregnant is proving to be untrue. It isn't preventing any such thing. But it is giving kids the impression that having sex is okay.

Like I said before, justifying BC and condoms in schools is surrender. The critics argue that PP does teach abstinence as an alternative but they have many definitions of abstinence. Part of their decades long campaign is to tell kids that having sex is OK. They don't imply it, they come right out and encourage them to explore their sexuality and arm them with the tools and techniques.

So your claim is that the rise is teenage birth is mainly PP's fault?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillianleab

In my opinion, teaching abstinence isn't the problem - teaching the current abstinence only program which is full of factually incorrect information and doesn't discuss contraceptives at all is the problem. That just means the kids who DO decide to have sex have no clue at how to prevent pregnancy or infection.

And what is the best way to prevent pregnancy or infection?

Furthermore, do we teach kids not to play with matches, or do we tell them that not playing with matches is the "best choice" but don't worry about playing with matches as long as they have a fire-extiguisher? Do we teach our kids that there are choices with regard to playing with matches, or do we simply prohibit them from doing it? Personally, I keep my kids from playing with matches in the first place.

Why is it any different with sex? Why are we teaching kids that not having sex is the "best choice" but there's really nothing to wory about as long as you have birth control. Why aren't we telling them not to have sex... and there is no other choice?

Quote:

We can't expect teens to grow into adulthood and be able to make informed decisions if we lie to them to keep their pants on when they're kids.

I'm not saying we should lie to them. But I am saying that as parents and educators we should take a stronger position on teen sex. It is NOT ALLOWED. If you do it you will suffer the consequences.

That is as truthful as can be... if you are a teen having sex, there will be consequences that range from social to medical to educational, to financial. Therefore, don't do it. Nor will we as authority figures assist you in do this or look the other way when you do this.

Why are we not taking this tact to the issue? Why are we saying it's okay as long as you use protection? Its NOT okay, and we need to stop giving kids the message that it is okay. And the only way to do that is to prohibit the action. That's abstinence education. And that is the argument against BC in schools.

[/quote]Uninformed teens = uninformed adults, and well... there are enough of those already! :D [/quote]

That is certainly true.

Quote:

If there were a program which focused on abstinence first, but also provided factual information about contraceptives, STDs, abortion, teen pregnancy and so on, I'd be all for it.

Well, I would be more in favor of that than what we have now. But I still see it as giving a mixed message of "It's okay as long as you don't get into trouble." I don't think its okay.

Quote:

I think that what people forget is that teens grow into adults, and while it might be nice for everyone to wait until marriage, that's just not the case for most.

That's the problem. And that is part of the abstinance education campaign that I'm talking about... a move similar to what MADD did for drunk driving and TRUTH did for teen smoking. Teaching kids that it's okay to say no, that waiting is a good thing, that they don't have to give in to peer pressure, and that those who are pushing you to do these things do not have your best interests at heart. After a decade (or more) of ad campaigns, drunk driving among teens is down and teen smoking is down. The message with smoking was "Don't Smoke", not "smoking is okay, as long as its cigars or pipes, not cigarrettes". The message with drinking was "If you drink, don't get behind the wheel" not "You can drive drunk as long as you are wearing a helmet." The messages were clear: this action is prohibbited and if you do it you will be hurt.

Why wouldn't a similar campaign work for abstinence education? Why are we so concerned with sending a mixed message to our kids that they shouldn't have sex... but if you do, used protection? Why aren't we simply saying "Don't have sex or you will suffer the consequences."

Quote:

So if two un-married 30-somethings decide to have sex, it's important they too know the risks and prevention methods. Personally, I'm more concerned with preventing teens from having sex than preventing consenting adults; so maybe I advocate "abstinence until adulthood". I don't know.

I can deal with that. What adults do isn't my concern. But what kids do IS my concern.

Elliot

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

So your claim is that the rise is teenage birth is mainly PP's fault?

No NK, I've said repeatedly it's the culture - but PP is a prime culprit in advancing that culture. It seems obvious to me their way has failed, they've had their chance for decades and you will never solve the problems of teen pregnancy, STD's and abortion by encouraging hormonal kids to engage in the very activities that put them at risk in the first place. Why is that not obvious to people?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

And what is the best way to prevent pregnancy or infection?

Why is it any different with sex? Why are we teaching kids that not having sex is the "best choice" but there's really nothing to wory about as long as you have birth control. Why aren't we telling them not to have sex... and there is no other choice?

The best way to prevent pregnancy and infection? Gee, how about telling kids the TRUTH instead of lying to them? How about making sure kids know how to use condoms so, if they decide as an adult to engage in sexual activity they know how to prevent pregnancy and infection? Or, so the teens who DO engage in it (you know they're out there, they always will be) don't wind up pregnant or with herpes?

I'm not saying tell them not to is best, but if you do, do it safe. I'm saying it's wrong to lie to our teens about sex, contraceptives and STDs. Stress abstinence, but make sure they are informed to make decisions to have SAFE sex as ADULTS. It's NOT acceptable for teens to be having sex, but sex education which talks about contraceptives doesn't have to condone it.

Quote:

I'm not saying we should lie to them. But I am saying that as parents and educators we should take a stronger position on teen sex. It is NOT ALLOWED. If you do it you will suffer the consequences.

That is as truthful as can be... if you are a teen having sex, there will be consequences that range from social to medical to educational, to financial. Therefore, don't do it. Nor will we as authority figures assist you in do this or look the other way when you do this.

Why are we not taking this tact to the issue? Why are we saying it's okay as long as you use protection? Its NOT okay, and we need to stop giving kids the message that it is okay. And the only way to do that is to prohibit the action. That's abstinence education. And that is the argument against BC in schools.

The problem is the current abstinence program DOES lie. It tells teens abortion makes you sterile and AIDS is transmitted via sweat and tears. Both of those assertions are WRONG and are there to scare the kids, not teach them. I agree, as parents and educators we should take a stronger position against teen sex, but you can get that message across without lies.

I never said tell them it's OK as long as you use protection. I said it's NOT OK to LIE. Again, I'm not opposed to abstinence education, I'm opposed to the current abstinence-only education.

Quote:

Well, I would be more in favor of that than what we have now. But I still see it as giving a mixed message of "It's okay as long as you don't get into trouble." I don't think its okay.

Sorry, but I don't see how telling kids about contraceptives and STD prevention is giving them the green light to have sex. Beyond that, back to my point about uneducated adults; we have to inform them at some point, and, by your own admission, you don't care what adults do. How can you expect adults to make the right decisions if they were never taught about the right decisions as teens?

Quote:

Teaching kids that it's okay to say no, that waiting is a good thing, that they don't have to give in to peer pressure, and that those who are pushing you to do these things do not have your best interests at heart.

Which is the same thing I'm saying. I just think it's important to include contraceptive and STD education with that information. I don't think it's sending a mixed message, I think it's educating them and making them equipped for the future. What good does it do to cut down on teen pregnancy rates and STD infections in teens, if it skyrockets once they hit their 20s because no one ever taught them how to prevent such things?

Quote:

I can deal with that. What adults do isn't my concern. But what kids do IS my concern.

And kids grow into adults. I'm all for keeping teens from having sex, but I don't want to see the infection rates and pregnancy rates jump a few years into the 20s.

What's wrong with telling teens to wait, stress the physical and emotional strain sex has on young relationships, stress how damaging pregnancy can be as a teen, how an STD can ruin your life, and that by waiting until they are in adulthood they are better equipped to handle these things. Then let them know once they DO decide to have sex once they are adults there are ways to prevent these things, and let them know about contraceptives. Talk about those things as something for the future, not the present. WAITING is for the present.

I'm really torn about contraceptives in school. I DON'T think the nurse should be able to hand out the pill without parental consent, but I'm on the fence about condoms. On the one hand teens can get them OTC, so unless we want to put an age limit on them, what's the difference? If condoms are easily accessible, maybe teens will be more likely to use them. Then again, maybe having access to them will encourage some teens to have sex sooner than they are ready. All I can say for sure is this: I was in high school less than ten years ago; I would NEVER have gone to the nurse to get condoms, and I didn't know anyone else who would either. I can also say the way my school handled sex ed did nothing to prevent me from doing way too much way to early. I, like most teens had the invincibility complex, and, lucky for me, it worked out in my favor. It did NOT work out in favor for several of my friends, however. Maybe recent graduates should be the ones who design sex ed programs; after all, they're the ones who know more than anyone else what teens are more likely to respond to.

Obviously the parents have failed that child anyway if they need to get BC or condoms at school, if they are having sex that young, if they are pregnant, and if they want to get an abortion, so we should force them to keep a baby they can't afford, don't want, can't raise properly, all the while messing up their own lives because their parents didn't do a good job and they had an accident?

Someone has to take responsibility for the kids and since the parents have failed and the child is incapable, why not give them the protection and options they need?

Tha parents have FAILED when it gets to the point that they are seeking help elsewhere. Maybe you can raise your children correctly, and they won't have that problem, and you will have the right to privacy, but when the parents have failed, they don't deserve privacy at the expense of their child.

Aren't our children worth protecting since their parents have failed? We tried to teach them better, it has'nt worked. My parents told me to not do thing when I was young and I didn't listen, it's the nature of children. I never got pregnant, or anything like that, but no one just does as their parents say all their life.

I think the real "future of guilt, shame, torment" lies in the teeagers who made a mistake and got pregnant because they were to afraid, didn't know about, or couldn't get protection, and then they are forced to have a child at a young age, and not be able to live their own lives first.

Planned parenthood does provide help to some people, and I'm sorry for your issue with them, but it's not planned parenthood who did that to your daughter. They made a mistake, obviously, but it wasn't their fault/mistake that caused things to end that way in in the first place.

Girls should be able to talk with their parents about getting an abortion or protection if thy want, but some parents won't allow them to get the pill, tell them not to have sex, tell them abortion is off-limits. The fact is that when the parents do not allow the girl to make her own choices and be okay with them, the girl ends up going to places like PP, which is unfortunate because we should be able to have a girl go to any doctor's office, any hospital, and get medical treatment.

I still don't believe in forcing women to have babies they don't want, can't afford, regret, and who they can'r provide or care for properly (unfair to that chid anyways), not for their parents, not for their boyfriends, not for any one else. They should only have to do what THEY Want to when it comes to reproduction.

Quote:

No NK, I've said repeatedly it's the culture - but PP is a prime culprit in advancing that culture. It seems obvious to me their way has failed, they've had their chance for decades and you will never solve the problems of teen pregnancy, STD's and abortion by encouraging hormonal kids to engage in the very activities that put them at risk in the first place. Why is that not obvious to people?

At least they're trying to help people by providing services, information, and protection instead of just telling them to keep it in their pant, which is obviously NOT working.

Sure they're not perfect, but neither is anyone or any other other program to help people. No one is successful 100% of the time.

Quote:

The problem is the current abstinence program DOES lie.

Thank you!

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillianleab

I'm saying it's wrong to lie to our teens about sex

Of course it is, lying is wrong on BOTH sides.

I'd rather see a teenager with a condom in their pocket that a baby in their arms.

Altenweg, I could hug youuuuuu.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillianleab

I'm saying it's wrong to lie to our teens about sex

Of course it is, lying is wrong on BOTH sides.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Of course it is, lying is wrong on BOTH sides.

I agree. I don't want to lie to our kids by telling them having an abortion makes you sterile or by telling them condoms are 100% effective or that having sex standing up prevents pregnancy.

I sort of wonder if we don't trust teens with decision making because we rarely give them access to the information they need to make decisions. Instead we pepper it with our own agendas and keep quiet about the things we don't want them to know. So many parents treat their kids like precious little snowflakes and when they get into adulthood they are clueless about how to rationalize, think critically or make informed decisions. I'm not saying we should leave it up to teens completely to have or not have sex, but I wonder if we started treating them (with regards to information) more like adults if they would be able to make better decisions on their own (less hand holding from the parents). It's been said time and time again that knowledge is power...

'Course then we mind end up with a bunch of power-drunk teens on our hands... :p

As if they aren't power-drunk anyway XD

Oh, I can drive, I'm invincible, the world owes me!

Kids. :P

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillianleab

I agree. I don't want to lie to our kids by telling them having an abortion makes you sterile or by telling them condoms are 100% effective or that having sex standing up prevents pregnancy.

I sort of wonder if we don't trust teens with decision making because we rarely give them access to the information they need to make decisions. Instead we pepper it with our own agendas and keep quiet about the things we don't want them to know. So many parents treat their kids like precious little snowflakes and when they get into adulthood they are clueless about how to rationalize, think critically or make informed decisions. I'm not saying we should leave it up to teens completely to have or not have sex, but I wonder if we started treating them (with regards to information) more like adults if they would be able to make better decisions on their own

Well, yes and no I suppose. Granted, there were things my parents could have taught me but didn't that would have been helpful. On the other hand I believe we've lost so much by not letting kids be kids. Parents need to be the parents and kids shouldn't be exposed to so many things they aren't equipped to handle. I hear people complain of TV, music and video games rotting their little brains - yet we want them to be exposed to all the details of adult sexual relationships? That doesn't make sense to me, 6 year olds should be playing tee-ball, finger painting and sliding down slides, not preparing for sexual relations.

Quote:

(less hand holding from the parents). It's been said time and time again that knowledge is power...

Oh I agree there should be less hand holding by parents, I have friends that just drive me nuts over the way they baby and coddle their kids.

Quote:

'Course then we mind end up with a bunch of power-drunk teens on our hands... :p

Exactly, lol... there has to be a balance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Altenweg

I'd rather see a teenager with a condom in their pocket that a baby in their arms.

And I'd rather see a baby in their arms than a "non-viable tissue mass" sucked out of their womb. :)

Quote:

And I'd rather see a baby in their arms than a "non-viable tissue mass" sucked out of their womb.

Not me, they'll be broke and miserable for their whole lives, the baby will not be treated the same way as if it is wanted, it may even be abused or have to go without because the parents can't provide because their lives were messed up by an unplanned pregnancy.The mother is also more liable to have complcations or even death during delivery because her body is not ready to give birth. I think that a viable and very much alive girl's life is more precious than a "non-viable tissue mass". Lesser of two evils I supposd.

Most (almost all) abortions are performed before 20 weeks, across the board, statistics state that.

According to the journal of american medicine, if the fetus can feel pain at all, it doesn't feel pain until at least 28 weeks.

The fetus is not typically even able to survive outside the womb (meaning its organs are not present or not functioning) until around 23 weeks.

Either way, it's a personal choice, and you have no right to say people shouldn't get an abortion because of your morals and values because they may not share your morals and values. Don't like abortions? Don't get one. Simple as that. Don't try to say that people shouldn't have a choice because YOU think it's wrong.

And tell me speechless, are you a man or a woman?