To Thread - Forum Home

The Mudcat Café TM
https://mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=105634
106 messages

BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..

20 Oct 07 - 08:31 PM (#2175602)
Subject: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

I had the most amazing conversation with my 19 year old son yesterday. We live in S. Portalnd and across the bridge in Portland, a middle school has indicated it will provide birth control to middle school kids......this has caused a national furore I am told (I don't watch tv much and read only local papers)--my position on it is that I suspect not many people are advocating for 6th, 7th and 8th graders to be having sex,but if they are, then SURELY it is better they do not get pregnant. My son, (a republican in training don't look at me. I don't know where he got it) said he thought this was an appalling idea and that it was 'giving permission' to these kids to have sex.   I view it very much as the parent who is a doctor and whose kids attend there who said -- I see kids in this age group everyday who are pregnant -- do we want this? NO! Do we want to prevent it.....sure do!

Anyway this conversation moved to drugs in high school.....I have always known my son likes marijuana (don't we all ) and the occasional drink but he told me there is EVERY KIND OF DRUG in high school in s. Maine (a somewhat laid back and behind the times area). He indicated if you wanted,cocaine was availaible in the school parking lot -- said he had tried it but 'it isn't worth $80). Said he tried Ecstasy in school - verdict: Mum - I would never take that again-- it was too darn good (this to a woman who knows alcohol is too darn good and still drinks).

This is MAINE for God'ssake -- what is happening around the country???? I worry for my non existant grandchildren......

Thoughts?

20 Oct 07 - 08:45 PM (#2175604)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Rapparee

Why would you think the opposite?

Drugs are everywhere, even in Amish schools. They have been for a VERY long time -- since the late 1950s, at least. A very fundamentalist college I knew of back in the 1970s had a serious problem with heroin. My wife smoked pot in high school in the 1950s; her father smoked "reefers" in college in the 1930s.

20 Oct 07 - 08:45 PM (#2175605)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Alice

When my son was in the 5th grade, he told me he knew the tree house where the other 5th grade kids who did drugs would go to smoke pot. One of his classmate's dad was the pusher... and I knew that guy from college, a druggie then, too. This is a small university town in Montana. It is Everywhere.

20 Oct 07 - 08:56 PM (#2175609)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Alice

My 20 year old who knew about 5th grade drugs grew his hair long and is a musician... I knew he was against drugs and alcohol, but it was only just about a week ago he called himself a "Straight Edge Kid" and I now know how seriously he has taken it all these years since grade school.

Straight Edge Kids>

20 Oct 07 - 08:57 PM (#2175610)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Ebbie

A related thought- and I recognize that it's a broad blanket indeed.

There is a young man in town who was a fiddle prodigy. By the time he was 11 he was amazing.

He is now 26 and is steeped in pot. Maybe heavier things - I personally have nothing against marijuana, although I suspect that going without drugs at all may be bettre. Kind of like those weight loss diets that tout low-fat, low-carb, low-calory treats. Wouldn't there be even less fat, carbs and fewer calories if you didn't indulge in them?)

Anyway he has not held a job, still lives at home and is frequently stoned out of his mind. I refuse to play music with him at those times, it's just too frustrating.

My point: The other day I saw him on the sidewalk with one of his "friends". And it struck me- one looked as scruffy as the other.

20 Oct 07 - 09:00 PM (#2175611)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Rapparee

My friend Tom lay dead from an overdose for five days in the July heat of Indianapolis, a needle in his arm.

My friend Bob died of stomach cancer brought on by cigarette smoke. He'd survived Vietnam.

My friend Steve died of throat cancer brought on by cigarette smoke. He'd been a CO during Vietnam.

Three old, good friends, all killed by drugs....

20 Oct 07 - 09:11 PM (#2175615)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Bobert

Please have yer son call me... I am completely outta pot and about to go mad...


B;)

20 Oct 07 - 09:51 PM (#2175632)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: GUEST,Bardan

Sympathies rapaire. That's hard stuff for anyone to cope with.

20 Oct 07 - 10:38 PM (#2175667)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Janie

A couple of weeks ago my son and I were listening to a Stephen Colbert interview on "All Things Considered." The interviewer inquired about his adolescent years - Colbert said he was not very rebellious "I smoked some pot and didn't do some homework, nothing major." My son turned to me in surprise and said, "Nothing major? Is that not a big deal?" He was at first shocked. Then seriously and genuinely asking. Then I could almost see the wheels beginning to turn in his brain. He enjoys the Colbert report on the rare occasion he sees it (neither his Dad or I have television) and certainly views him as a respectable celebrity. I realized he was considering that maybe some things that he considered to be 'beyond the pale' were perhaps not.

I don't think Colbert was intending at all to plant seeds in a 13 year old mind that smoking pot and blowing off school work is 'no big deal.' But he did. If Colbert had been, say, a gansta' rapper, or a bad boy sports icon, my boy would have given no weight to his statement. He is quite capable of considering the source. In this case, however, the source was one he deemed worth considering.

My point is that our kids get messages in all kinds of ways that drugs, alcohol, early sex, etc. might be ok. I can't pick that seed out of the fertile ground of his young mind. I can only hope that our further discussion and the values I am trying to teach make germination unlikely.

20 Oct 07 - 11:35 PM (#2175691)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: katlaughing

I know my son has tried several different kinds of drugs, though I didn't know it at the time. I know he still does pot on occasion. Neither of my daughters have, though one does smoke. They never saw me use anything. I never did pot or anything else. Rog smokes. I'd read years ago that if a daughter sees her mother smoke and/or drink etc. she will most likely do the same. It was likewise for a son and father. Despite my son's experimenting, my kids have all done okay and I know they've been surrounded by drugs in school, etc. Good examples still count for something at home. I regret that I didn't keep Rog from smoking in front of them when they were young. FWIW, they are both trying to stop, now.

21 Oct 07 - 12:44 AM (#2175710)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

I guess from these comments that Iwas just totally out in left field on this one......

21 Oct 07 - 01:16 AM (#2175718)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Greg B

I'm with you, m8--- I don't quite see the connection (connexion?)
between oral contraceptives and "drugs."

To me if a woman is old enough to conceive a child, she's old
enough to make her own decision about sexual intercourse (or
not), and old enough to be offered a woman's universal right
to determine, by whatever means, the disposition of her own
body.

Adults seem to think that young folks will modulate their sexuality
based upon the fear of pregnancy. Selective amnesia. Did they?
Or more to the point, did their pregnant friends?

These same folks bitch about abortion...

21 Oct 07 - 03:39 AM (#2175744)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Big Al Whittle

straight edge kids - so that's where the folk music was going on......

21 Oct 07 - 04:10 AM (#2175751)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: GUEST,.gargoyle

In the following article it is estimated that for some areas one in four youth, aged 13 to 23, is infected with a Sexually Transmitted Disease.

It will take more than free rain-coats to weather this storm.

http://www.csuchico.edu/cjhp/5/3/080-091-jerman.pdf

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

21 Oct 07 - 04:32 AM (#2175762)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Richard Bridge

Oh well said Greg B.

21 Oct 07 - 10:23 AM (#2175901)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: GUEST,Bardan

I think the worrying about giving kids implicit 'permission' to have sex by offering contraceptives is rubbish. Even if it does have that effect I believe I'm right in saying the average age for first sex is roughly the same all over Europe despite different ages of consent. So if people are quite happy to ignore *explicit* permission from the state why would there be worries about offering them condoms or the pill or whatever?

I don't believe the assertion further up either though. Just because someone is able to conceive does not make them ready for a sexual relationship or a child. I mean can't some girls theoretically conceive at 12? I think education and encouragement in the right direction are far better than draconian measures though. And certainly better than depriving people who are having sex of protection.

21 Oct 07 - 10:32 AM (#2175905)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: John Hardly

"Adults seem to think that young folks will modulate their sexuality
based upon the fear of pregnancy. Selective amnesia. Did they?

Quite obviously, yes. The comparitive pregnancy rate is astronomically higher since the advent of abortion on demand.

"Or more to the point, did their pregnant friends?"

Obviously not. But there were fewer extra-maritally pregnant friends going through this fifty years ago.

21 Oct 07 - 12:31 PM (#2175973)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: katlaughing

Cite your sources, please, John.

21 Oct 07 - 12:50 PM (#2175981)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

Nothing too surprising here, I'd have thought. I note (and welcome) the way that this conversation tends to rubbish the simplistic assumption that views come in packaged sets, so that if you know someone's views on one issue you can product how they'll think on a host of others in a knee-jerk fashion - in this case sexual mores, on the one hand, and drugs, on the other.

Life isn't that simple, and people aren't that simple either.

21 Oct 07 - 12:53 PM (#2175984)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Richard Bridge

By and large I'm in favour of pleasure, and the alleviation of the risks that go with it.

22 Oct 07 - 08:52 AM (#2176346)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Grab

But there were fewer extra-maritally pregnant friends going through this fifty years ago.

Were there really fewer pregnant teens back then? I think more likely you didn't hear about them. Girl married boy in a shotgun wedding (hence avoiding the "extra-marital" part), or girl got a backstreet abortion (and maybe died), or girl had kid and it was raised as her "sister" or "cousin" (and in some cases it could have been her half-sister, since sexual abuse was virtually unreported, and unreportable), or girl had kid and it went to Barnado's or whatever your equivalent is. And no-one said zip about the pregnancy. Look further back, like 100 or more years, and teenage pregnancy was the norm. Also compare to places like Romania where birth control wasn't available, and look at the orphanages there. Kinsey put the boot into the 1950s folk myth of straitlaced-ness fairly comprehensively - it turned out that all this stuff *was* going on, but no-one dared to speak out in case the rest of their town-full of hypocrites turned on them.

Anyway, Trubrit started the thread. Age of son suggests she's probably 40ish, so the comparison is with schools in the 1970s, not the 1950s.

And it's pretty ironic for me that the Flower Power generation and their kids are saying how shocked they are that kids today are experimenting with sex and drugs! As Greg says, it's selective amnesia.

Graham.

22 Oct 07 - 09:11 AM (#2176358)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Rapparee

When I worked in a small NE Ohio town in the early 1970s some of the parents were truly shocked to find out that there was a drug problem in the school there. Some of them had moved there to get away from the drug problems in the Cleveland schools, and here it was!

Golly. The old-time residents weren't shocked. They had figured it was just a matter of time before what happened in the "big city" made its way to the small town 30 miles away.

I don't know of a single town anywhere in the US where drugs aren't available to school children, even down to the elementary level.

Sex has always been with us, and as my grandmother said, "When they're ready, they will want to. All you can do is try to train them not to until they're old enough to handle it." She'd know -- she was 17 when her first child, my father, was born after four months of marriage.

22 Oct 07 - 09:12 AM (#2176359)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Richard Bridge

Grab - no I'm not.

22 Oct 07 - 09:25 AM (#2176375)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

I did start this thread so will 'weigh in'...I wasn't really intending to compare schools with then and now -- I went to school in the UK and atually I am late (very late) fiftyish.....! I think my amazement on the conversation with my son was to do with DEGREE -- obviously I know drugs are out there and are pretty endemic.....but I guess I was truly shocked that a high school in Maine had cocaine and heroin easily available. I'll confess to being naieve.

Also, I was shocked that my son did not see the merits of making birth control available to young sexually active teens -- that blew me away, as has the response of the community to this. People are making noises about recalling the school committee who passed the initiative...........it seems out of all proportion to everything.

As a child of the 60s I do have enough understanding to know that kids are going to drink, have sex and take drugs.........; doesn't mean it wasn't hard to absorb when it was MY kids doing all of the above. But we have always encouraged them to be safe in their practices -- so was really puzzled why my son would not agree with benefits for other kids that had readily been available to him and to his sisters.

22 Oct 07 - 11:20 AM (#2176462)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Donuel

A good ol Amish ecstasy barn raising... who da thunk it.



Times and sayings change as the life condition and influences change society...


60's "tune in turn on drop out"

late 60's "if it feels good do it"

70's insert any ABBA or Bee Gee's lyric "________ _____ "

80's "Do the right thing"

late 80's "Just say NO!"

90's "You gotta do what you gotta do"

2000 "you are with us or you are against us"

22 Oct 07 - 12:55 PM (#2176547)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Bill D

"Also, I was shocked that my son did not see the merits of making birth control available to young sexually active teens..."

This is one of the most difficult issues to resolve. It seems everyone has a gut reaction to the idea....for OR against. It seems like it is just saying "here...use these, and do anything you wish..", but it also seems that many will just 'do anything they wish', anyway, and they might as well be protected.

   Anytime you have a controversy strewn with debates over moral AND psychological opinions, you'll never get any sort of consensus.

They try to solve it by requiring 'parental approval, but that hardly addresses the real problem...but only moves it back one level.

It is similar to the issue of making clean needles available to drug addicts.....
   I think I am mostly in favor of making ANY protection available to kids, even without parents' approval....even though it makes me sad that it is necessary.

22 Oct 07 - 12:58 PM (#2176549)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Grab

I didn't mean everyone, Richard - sorry, should have made it clearer. But those who *have* said they're shocked seem to be of that era. Same as the European generation of parents who were so shocked at Flower Power were themselves pretty damn promiscuous during WW2. As always, the story is "Do as we tell you, not as we do"...

Graham.

22 Oct 07 - 01:05 PM (#2176560)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Ebbie

I don't know what Donuel's comment about 'Amish Ecstasy barn raising' refers to but in my opinion the Amish are among the most vulnerable to drug abuse. Ignorance has that effect.

22 Oct 07 - 02:51 PM (#2176671)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: ranger1

TRUBRIT, all of those drugs have been available in Maine schools for a long time. I graduated from a rural high school of 600 students 20 years ago, and they were all available then.

As for the contraceptive issue at the middle school, what has been left out of most of the hype is the fact that the parents of those girls have to sign a release stating that they give permission to the school to dispense the pills to them. It's not like the school is doing it without parental knowledge or consent.

22 Oct 07 - 03:01 PM (#2176679)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Rapparee

Ebbie, I worked for 12 years in Geauga County and 16 in Elkhart County -- both of them have Amish populations that are quite large. I think he's referring to my earlier statement that there were drugs in the Amish schools, and there were. I know of one bar in Middlefield, OH that had part of the ceiling reinforced so that the bartender could, when necessary, get the attention of the young, unchurched, Amish men by shooting off a .44. At closing, even in winter, those young men unable to stand were dragged outside and picked up by a farm wagon which rolled them off at their homes.

Once Churched things changed, usually.

Story goes of a very respected Amish leader (I knew him and he was) went into a bar, sat down with a "Yankee" friend, ordered a beer, lit up a cigarette, and said, "Well, this is the last of these I'll have for quite a while."

"What's wrong, Uri?" his friend asked. "Medical problems?"

"No," Uri replied, "they just elected me Bishop."

22 Oct 07 - 07:25 PM (#2176889)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: SINSULL

I have been following the news story on this school and I am confused about a few things. First, these children are under 13 years of age - is anyone monitoring who they are having sex with? Doesn't stautory rape possibly figure into this?

Second, one of the board members pointed out that this was necessary to prevent unwanted pregnancies. I have to wonder: exactly how many pregnancies occur in this school's stuent body (no pun intended) annually? If it is a huge number, perhaps education on pregancy prevention and even abstinence is in order.

This is the same school district that is mired in a fiscal mess having gone millions over budget with little or no explanation. Are they trying to draw attention away from the missing millions?

by the way, this is not the first scholl in the US or even in Maine to offer birth control so why has the Press jumped all over ito

22 Oct 07 - 07:28 PM (#2176895)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: SINSULL

Deborah,
I am amazed that you don't know about the existence of drugs in school yards. I went to a Cathiloc grammar school and at 12 could have told you where you get drugs although it was usually pot in those days.

Humorous note: The same school district is debating banning peanut butter in school. Detention for PP&B; gold star for getting laid safely.

22 Oct 07 - 11:08 PM (#2176974)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

Sins and Ranger 1 -- I DO know the drugs are out there in the schools -- my shock was to do with the TYPE of drugs that my son indicates are readily available -- the nature of the drugs in the school yards is what has blown me away -- heroin and cocaine I did not expect in S Portland High School.

I liked (and agreed with ) Bill's thoughful comments. None of this is easy! I am ecstatic that my three kids, youngest now 19, have made it this far without any unwanted pregnancy, heavy drugs, (that I am aware of), jail time and/or any record to speak of. And they all have HS diplomas - one has a four year degree, and one an Associate's degree and all three are gainfully employed. PHEW!!

23 Oct 07 - 08:38 AM (#2177181)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: jacqui.c

I became a teenager at the beginning of the 60s. No sex education in schools and none from my parents either. I learned what I knew from the other kids at school but that didn't stop me from getting pregnant at 17 and ending up having to get married, against the wishes of my parents. My first sexual experience was when I was 14.

Now, if there had been sex education and some way to get protection - I didn't even know about condoms then - maybe my life would have been different. Not better, just different.

Some children are probably always going to be starting a sexual life before they are ready - due to ignorance, parental neglect etc. IMO it is better that those children have somewhere to turn to get, at the least, protection against pregnancy and maybe some guidance as to preventing STDs from someone who gives a damn.

I can't ever remember drugs being available when I was at school in North London. Probably a good thing - I was vulnerable enough at that time to be a real target. I worry about my grandchildren, growing up in an age when this becomes more of a problem.

23 Oct 07 - 09:25 AM (#2177213)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Greg B

I graduated high school 30 years ago. Went to a suburban Catholic
high school, considered quite a 'shelter' in the San Francisco
Bay Area (Hayward--- not like it was Berkeley or anything).

Within a week or so of arrival, I was surprised to overhear a schoolmate
trading for LSD by our lockers. We definitely had a 'burn out' clique;
the guys with the pea-coats that reeked of 'resin.'

We also had our share of pregnant girls. And the absurd rule that
once a girl began to 'show,' she was expelled. No exception for rape
or incest. She was out. But abortion was 'murder.' When questioned on
it the old bat that enforced this rule explained that pregnant girls
were a 'bad example.' I never had the nerve to ask her if she felt
like an 'accessory' to 'murder,' since she basically forced girls
who didn't want an unwanted pregnancy to ruin their lives to have
abortions...which she called 'murder.' I'd like to now.

It's one thing to tell kids not to have sex, using whatever
moral, health, and other arguments to influence the decision.

But what kind of control freak needs to hold the 'fear of pregnancy'
gun to their heads in order to get them to comply? It doesn't just
hold the teens themselves hostage it holds the potential child
hostage to being born into an unhappy set of circumstances. And
these are the same hypocrites who drive around with anti-abortion
bumper stickers and talk about the 'sanctity' of 'the family!'

Seems to me like it's all about asserting control over youngsters
at any cost, and without regard to their volition or rights.

23 Oct 07 - 10:21 AM (#2177247)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Grab

Sins, I don't know about you, but I damn sure don't want 13-year-old boys arrested for statutory rape. Nor even 15-year-old boys.

The statistics are actually pretty clear about virginity. The majority of girls lose their virginity before they're 18. The majority of boys don't. This says more about girls becoming sexually active earlier and soliciting the boys, rather than the other way around!

And yes, it does look like better sex education is in order round there...

Graham.

23 Oct 07 - 11:34 AM (#2177332)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Greg B: "To me if a woman is old enough to conceive a child, she's old
enough to make her own decision about sexual intercourse (or
not), and old enough to be offered a woman's universal right
to determine, by whatever means, the disposition of her own
body"

There have been cases of 12-year old girls conceiving - do you consider them old enough to "make decision's about her own body and its disposition"? Just because a child / girl / woman is physically capable of becoming pregnant at a given age, it doesn't follow that they should. Perhaps thousands of years ago when life spans rarely went beyond 40 and people had to get their living done early, such a thing might have been feasible but times have changed and society expects different things now. We spend almost a quarter of our lives in education and at least a similar amount of time before most people even get married. Having to take care of a child puts such a young mother at a disadvantage (I know because I have seen it first hand as well as having studied up on it). It is not a disadvantage that can't be overcome with enough of the right kind of support from friends and family, but that isn't always on offer.

As supposedly "grown-ups" we have a duty to look after our younger memebers of society to ensure they get the best possible start in life and the rigth kind of direction. We don't let kids of 12 drive cars on the public roads, or smoke or drink, though many of them are able to do so physically (and indeed do so). The point is that there is a big difference between being physically capable of something and emotionally and psychologically ready to take responsibility for the possible consequences. as the say goes "any old fool of a man can make a child, it takes a real man to raise one" We do not consider children up to this level of maturity and so try and keep them as far as possible from harm's way until they develop that maturity enough to look out for themselves. A typical comment I've heard from many women is that they wish they hadn't let their boy'friend' pressure them into having sex when they were young on the blackmail that the love would stop otherwise. Only a more grown-up woman can spot that kind of nonsense, so it makes sense to try and teach and protect our kids too.

Despite the fact that kids may do things they would be better off not doing, I disagree with giving out contraception to younger kids on principle. I think it does tend to give kids the impression that such behaviour is at least not frowned upon and is ok, when this is not in their best interests. I know many kids will experiment with all the wrong stuff anyway (I am living proof of that) but it doens't help if no-one from the grown up world to whom they consciously or unconciosuly seek guidance, does not set limits.

Another approach would be for society to send out avery strong and unequivocal message that sex at too young an age is not good for those involved - emotionally, psychologically or physically. That's not happening at present if you take a look at what passes for entertainment etc etc., Underage pregnancies etc., will only reduce in incidence if the 'water' of society as a whole in which these 'fish' swim undertakes a shake-up of its attitudes.

23 Oct 07 - 11:45 AM (#2177343)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Jaqui "No sex education in schools and none from my parents either"

Obviosuly that's not a good thing either. One solution might be sex-eductaion for PARENTS! Of course, we think they don't need it (obviously they knew enough to be parents) but it's more complicated than that. Schools should run evening courses taeching parents how to approach their kids on a range of topics, from drugs to sex, to running a home. While you might think parents automatically can do all that stuff, it doesn't mean they are abel to effectively transmit their knowledge to their kids in a relaxed way.

23 Oct 07 - 11:51 AM (#2177353)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Greg B: "When questioned on
it the old bat that enforced this rule explained that pregnant girls
were a 'bad example.' I never had the nerve to ask her if she felt
like an 'accessory' to 'murder,' since she basically forced girls
who didn't want an unwanted pregnancy to ruin their lives to have
abortions...which she called 'murder.' I'd like to now"

I agree on this one. That's not the right way to do things. Once the girl got pregnant - for whatever reason - the only christian thing to do is suport her and the new human life growing in her, and to continue that support after the baby is born. That's a job for the whole of society, starting with the immediate family and working outwards in a ripple.

23 Oct 07 - 12:11 PM (#2177365)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Becca72

The issue at the local middle school (children 11 - 14 years of age) is about oral contraceptives for the female students. They have been offering condoms in school for several years now with no hubbub. I read in the local paper that in Maine there are approximately 20 pregnancies per year for girls under the age of 15. 20 per year. I guess they're all happening at this particular middle school. I have no problems whatsoever with handing out condoms to these kids and showing them how to use them properly as well as sex education. What I do have a problem with is them given the pill to 11,12 and 13 year old girls who aren't finished developing and growing yet. Do they have any idea what the long term effects will be? How are these children going to deal with the side effects, or remembering to take the pill every day at the exact same time? Seems to me that condoms are a more effective method for people this age.
Also, to comment on Ranger1's remark about needing parental permission.. The parents have to sign a form giving their children permission to be treated in the clinic for ANYTHING. Once in the clinic the children and healthcare providers don't need to tell the parents what the kids are there for.

23 Oct 07 - 01:32 PM (#2177430)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Greg B

Normally, statutory rape laws recognize age differences between
partners. This keeps 19-year-old men from getting convicted of
statutory rape in engaging in consensual sex with their 17-year-old
girlfriend after the prom. It also recognizes that there's a difference
between an eighth-grader experimenting sexually with a sixth-grader,
and his (or her) doing the same with a third-grader. It works pretty
well.

I interpret those virginity statistics differently: most teen-age
girls have the one and only thing required to persuade a member of
the opposite sex to deflower them in the social convention: a vagina.

Boys, on the other hand seem to have a higher bar set for them
by the pool of potential partners. Those that do succeed in
becoming sexually active, however, tend to enjoy the same success
with multiple partners, over time. Older boys, as they proceed
through secondary school, are able to be successful with and
interested in the girls in the lower grades. It's much more rare
for an older girl to have any interest in a younger boy.

The result isn't too different from seal rookeries--- there are
a smaller number of successful males servicing a population of
available females.

23 Oct 07 - 03:30 PM (#2177512)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: ranger1

Becca, they added an opt-out clause once the hubbub started allowing kids to use the clinic but not to receive the contraceptives.

23 Oct 07 - 03:32 PM (#2177516)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Becca72

It was my understanding that hasn't been approved yet, Ranger1. Just read an article in the Press Herald today about it.

23 Oct 07 - 07:21 PM (#2177669)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Becca72; "The parents have to sign a form giving their children permission to be treated in the clinic for ANYTHING. Once in the clinic the children and healthcare providers don't need to tell the parents what the kids are there for"

I'd find that a bit alarming. I think clinics should not have carte blanche to treat kids for anything without informing their parents. It sounds a bit like those competition forms in some countries that ask compeitors to tick a box asking if they agree to be contacted by the company in future. Of course, it's for marekting spam, but if you don't tivck the box, they cliam they can't contact you to inform you if you've won the competition either. It's worth remembering that in all the main totalitarian regimes, Mao's China, Stalin's Russia, Hitler's Hitler Youth, Pol Pot's Cambodia, etc., the state targeted children, weaning them away from their parents, trying to step into their place, undermine the parents. They wanted to make the state, and not the family, the first stop ofm loyalty for the children.

23 Oct 07 - 07:27 PM (#2177672)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Becca72

I do find it alarming, Nickhere, but that's the way it works here in Maine, at least. Parents do not need to be consulted in matters of drugs, mental health or reproductive health issues. They claim that the kids have a right to privacy. I have a problem with that when you're talking about 11 and 12 year olds.

One more reason why I'm glad I decided long ago not to have kids.

23 Oct 07 - 11:49 PM (#2177792)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Kent Davis

TRUBRITT,

You stated, regarding giving birth control to middle school kids, "My son...thought this was an appalling idea ...I view it very much as the parent who is a doctor and whose kids attend there who said -- I see kids in this age group everyday who are pregnant-- do we want this? NO! Do we want to prevent it.....sure do"

Did you know a lot of pregnant preteens when you were a preteen, when children's access to birth control and even information about birth control was much more limited? If not, maybe your son has a valid point.

Kent

24 Oct 07 - 05:38 AM (#2177907)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Grab

Boys, on the other hand seem to have a higher bar set for them by the pool of potential partners.

That's kind of what I meant. If a girl wants sex, she can get it whenever she wants by soliciting the boy of her choice. If a boy wants sex, chances are he can't because the girls are the ones who do the choosing. This rather rules out "statutory rape".

Graham.

24 Oct 07 - 08:16 AM (#2177994)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: jacqui.c

Grab

That's OK but for the fact that there are girls out there with very low self esteem and families who do not make them feel loved or wanted. Any sort of attention at all from a boy can influence those girls and they will go to any lengths to keep that bit of affection. They learn from experience that to deny a boy sex means that they lose the relationship and can be seen as promiscuous as a result.

In that sort of situation their parents probably haven't done any sort of job of sex education and so they may be unaware of the consequences or know where to go to get some sort of protection. That was certainly the case in the early 60s, when I was in that situation. Maybe not so much now, but when a boy says bareback or I'm gone a kid like this is likely to agree to that, just to have someone she perceives as caring for her.

24 Oct 07 - 10:54 AM (#2178138)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Grab

Jacqui, I'm sure it happens a lot. But said girl could ditch that boy and get another one any day. The sad fact there is that they don't realise they're the ones who could be in control, just because they're not used to the idea.

But try being a lad whose contact with girls is a string of "you gotta be kidding?! go out with you?!" reactions, especially when the source of that is likely because you're at the bottom of the male pecking (or punching-and-kicking) order. And even that puts you in the minority of being a lad who'd have the guts to ask a girl out - all too many have such low confidence that they wouldn't dare to think of it.

I guess the bottom line is that for a lot of kids, adolescence is the worst time of their lives, not just with the opposite sex but also with bullying from the same sex. The best you can do is survive it and spend the next 5-10 years healing.

Graham.

24 Oct 07 - 11:51 AM (#2178184)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Greg B

Kent:

>Did you know a lot of pregnant preteens when you were a preteen, when
>children's access to birth control and even information about birth
>control was much more limited? If not, maybe your son has a valid
>point.

Times have, as the saying goes, changed. Kids are starting sex early,
very early. At ages where we'd have been thrilled by a kiss on the
cheek. They do so in spite of admonitions and advice to the contrary.

And they do so whether or not they have access to contraception.

>Parents do not need to be consulted in matters of drugs, mental
>health or reproductive health issues. They claim that the kids have a
>right to privacy. I have a problem with that when you're talking
>about 11 and 12 year olds.

The principle at work here is that laws should look out first for
the interest of the child. There is overwhelming interest that
a young person be able to get treatment for mental health, drug,
and reproductive issues without being inhibited either by fear of
parental response or by parental refusal of said treatment.
Indeed, the most important thing in such situations may be a
conversation with a competent professional--- and the availability
of confidential treatment in a clinical setting may be the ONLY
place where a girl asks for the pill actually has the opportunity
to have such an important conversation, rather than with a peer.

I find the whole notion of the sorts of 'rights' which people
sometimes think they can assert over their children to be
somewhat disquieting, in any case. Perhaps because the principle
is so often asserted in a blatant attempt to take away women's
reproductive rights.

24 Oct 07 - 01:40 PM (#2178267)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: jacqui.c

Too true Greg.

24 Oct 07 - 01:52 PM (#2178276)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

Surely strictly speaking it's statutory rape for both of them, if they are under age.

24 Oct 07 - 02:05 PM (#2178287)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Ebbie

Grab, you say, "The majority of girls lose their virginity before they're 18. The majority of boys don't. This says more about girls becoming sexually active earlier and soliciting the boys, rather than the other way around!"

It implies far more, imo, that it is often the older boys who pressure the younger girls into sex. Two reasons: 1) Older boys are most often more self-confident and have a clearer aim than the peers of the younger girls. 2) Younger girls are often deeply flattered that older boys chose them to pay attention to.

24 Oct 07 - 04:30 PM (#2178408)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Kent Davis

Greg B.,

Times have indeed changed. The question is what to do about it. For forty years, easier and earlier access to birth control has been promoted as part of the solution. My point (and, I suppose, the point of TRUBRITT's son) is that it hasn't worked.

The second quote is not mine, but rather Becca72's. However, as a physician and parent (and formerly, very briefly, a child protective service worker), I do "have a problem with" the idea that parental consent laws should not cover reproductive health. I can't legally remove a wart from a girl's big toe without parental permission, but it's O.K. if I remove a child from her womb without even their knowledge?!

Kent

24 Oct 07 - 07:30 PM (#2178526)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: jacqui.c

Kent

Removing a wart from the toe isn't something that a child would be scared to tell their parent about. Pregnancy is. My daughter, now 38, told me, after a sex education lesson when a schoolgirl of about 14, that she was the only girl in her class who would not be afraid of telling their parents that they were pregnant.

Is it better that a child has somewhere to turn to in that situation if they really cannot tell their parents, or do we want them to try and deal with the problem themselves, based on old wives tales or trying to find someone who will do the deed off the radar?

I was five months pregnant before I told my parents and was disowned because I preferred to marry the baby's father than to go along with my father's plan to send me away until the baby was born and then have it adopted. Quite often the kids who do get pregnant are in family situations where they do not trust their parents to react in a non frightening way as they have little sign of caring from those parents.

24 Oct 07 - 09:01 PM (#2178558)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

Several people have said it better than me -- the world is so very different now. Having said that, reading the local paper the middle school kids at King are QUITE CLEAR that the majority of them are not sexually active but that this is a need to protect a certain smaller group by offering birth control. I don't know what the answer is -- I truly don't. But it cannot be right for children to be having children; better they don't have sex, yes -- most of them won't while still in middle school, good - but if they do have sex, let's give them condoms and birthcontrol so they do not become parents before they are nearly ready -- and at the same time work with them on making great choices. Having said that, both my daughters were on the pill with my support and love at the age of 15. Turns out one of them was sexually active that young, and one was not . Now they are 25 and 22, lovely young women, building their lives and not trying to raise babies on their own.

24 Oct 07 - 10:00 PM (#2178578)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Kent Davis

I also do not know what the answer is. Actually, I know that there will never be a complete answer to the problem as long as this old world stands.
However, there are partial answers, and some are better than others. Sad situations like jacqui c describes have always occurred and will always occur, but they occur more often in some sub-cultures than in others and more often in certain periods of history than others.   
Birth control has been readily available for a long time. Unwanted pregnancies are still occurring. What we, as a culture, have been trying for the last 4 decades hasn't worked. Why would it start working now?
Kent

24 Oct 07 - 10:06 PM (#2178581)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

Some unwanted pregnancies will always happen because some people (youg and old) are in total denial .... sex and babies (stunning but true) don't go together in their minds. Many people are having sex because they are lonely, sad, whatever and think this will buy them some happiness....

I am so glad my kids made it through -- I wonder what being a grandparent of the next generation will feel like......

25 Oct 07 - 07:19 AM (#2178744)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

The assumption seems to be that the reason for being afraid to tell the parents would always be to do with fear of being prevented from having an abortion.

I'd think that in today's world it might be at least equally to do with fear of being pressured into having an abortion.

25 Oct 07 - 08:00 AM (#2178762)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: jacqui.c

Kevin - the reason for being afraid to tell parents is because being sexually active would not be approved of and the kids who do go down that route quite often have parents who put the fear of god into their children, without showing them any real love. The child is afraid of the wrath of the parent/s, not what action might be taken so far as the baby is concerned.

25 Oct 07 - 08:06 AM (#2178770)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Greg B

Kent:

>I can't legally remove a wart from a girl's big toe without parental
>permission, but it's O.K. if I remove a child from her womb without
>even their knowledge?!

Yes.

25 Oct 07 - 01:37 PM (#2179060)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

"kids are having sex at an earlier and earlier age"..... can anyone explain why this is? Who or what is sexualising these kids at ever younger ages if not us grown ups? Maybe if we paused to consider the causes rather than just 'try and deal with practicalities' (without bopthering to ask where these 'practical problems' come from) perhaps then we might find the real solution instead of using kids to push our own liberal agendas....

Greg B: "Kent:

>I can't legally remove a wart from a girl's big toe without parental
>permission, but it's O.K. if I remove a child from her womb without
>even their knowledge?!

Yes"

Unbelieveable.

25 Oct 07 - 05:33 PM (#2179203)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

If you go back to the start of the thread the interesting point was that the fact that a 19 year old didn't share that agenda was what was seen as amazing.

25 Oct 07 - 05:44 PM (#2179211)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Greg B

Oh of course. Let's just change ALL of the media, or make sure that
every TV has its V-chip activated, as well as those of any house
they visit. Control anything that is ever said by ALL of their
peers, and monitor and control their discussions over lunch. That'll
'nip it in the bud.' Great solution.

And, let's compel pregnant 13-year-olds to have the baby, that'll
teach the other kids.

25 Oct 07 - 05:47 PM (#2179216)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

I didn't see that list of suggestions from anyone, Greg.

25 Oct 07 - 06:16 PM (#2179243)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Greg B: "The principle at work here is that laws should look out first for
the interest of the child"

Which of course explains clearly why it also allows for so many hundreds of thousands of them to be killed before they are even born in the US and elsewhere.

26 Oct 07 - 09:58 AM (#2179672)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Grab

"kids are having sex at an earlier and earlier age"..... can anyone explain why this is?

Can anyone explain *if* this is? I've still not heard anything conclusive saying that this is the case. Sure, the Victorians and their descendants this century liked to pretend that sex didn't happen, or at least that it didn't happen outside of marriage. That's pretty comprehensively proved to be false though.

A link with some historical background. So back in the Middle Ages, girls *married* at 14-16 was usual, and the only reason men didn't marry was because they couldn't support a family then. Shakespeare wrote Juliet as being 13, remember.

Granted, we've moved on a bit from the Middle Ages - with contraception, sex and marriage can be disconnected. Age of reaching sexual maturity is unlikely to be significantly affected though - if anything, medical data says that it's happening *earlier* with better diet and medical care (and possibly chemicals in food).

so many hundreds of thousands of them to be killed before they are even born

Yep - because it's not a child at that point, it's a collection of cells which *might* become a child. You may disagree, but it isn't your choice, it's the choice of the woman whose body this collection of cells is in.

Graham.

26 Oct 07 - 11:46 AM (#2179737)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: GUEST,SINS

Which child, Nick? The pregnant 13 year old or her fetus?

26 Oct 07 - 07:29 PM (#2180095)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Guest:Sins: "Which child, Nick? The pregnant 13 year old or her fetus?"

I'm not sure what you're on about here. I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Grab: "Yep - because it's not a child at that point, it's a collection of cells which *might* become a child. You may disagree, but it isn't your choice, it's the choice of the woman whose body this collection of cells is in"

I disagree first of all with what you are trying to claim (directly and indirectly) with your semantics. 'Fetus' (in this context) is a term for a stage in the development of a human being, just as 'child' is a term to describe another stage in that development. A child, by the way, is also a collection of cells - which might (if no-one interferes by destroying it) become an adult at some stage. A child is not an adult, a fetus is not a child, but they are all the same human, whether you like it or not.

But anyway we have been over this at length in another thread, and if you are still trying to say black is white, we can only agree to disagree.

As for it not being my choice - no, of course it's not. Thankfully I cannot be held responsible if someone destroys the life within them (for whatever reason). But I could be held responsible if I say or do nothing to try and prevent it. And by that I mean arguing my view, voting according to my conscience, trying to persuade others of the rightness of my argument, giving whatever support I can to those who wish to keep their child - either directly when the case is known to me personally, or through my taxes used to support people who find themselves in this situation, etc., etc.,

And I'm sure, being modern, democratic and pluralistic and so on, you wouldn't want to deny me that right!

BTW, pro-choice/ abortion lobby, I think you might have misunderstood the motivation of pro-lifers / anti-abortionists, when you criticise their motivation for trying to persuade kids not to abort. It's not about making that kid's life hard, or to 'punish' them (which wouldn't be very christian), or 'set an example', but to try and preserve the new human life, out of respect for the sanctity of life. Of course, and I shouldn't even need to have to state this, if the pregnancy were threatening the life of the child (i.e if having the baby would result in the death of the child either immeditaely or soon after) abortion is an acceptable course of action. But even young teenagers have sucessfully carried to full term (Grab has pointed out how kids got married and had children at very young ages in the past, even quoting the example of Shakespeare and his 13-year old Juliet, and again, according to Grab, they're maturing at an ever younger age), so abortion shouldn't be a necessary option in most cases.

Anyway, as I said, we've been over this at length in another thread and we're not likely to convince each other by the looks of it. We'll all have to answer for our own actions in the end.

26 Oct 07 - 07:57 PM (#2180129)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

I think most of us here are a collection of cells. Or a mass of molecules. Or an assembly of atoms.

And human beings as well.

26 Oct 07 - 10:02 PM (#2180198)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: George Papavgeris

Is it me, or do many of the posts in this thread show an attitude of "it was good enough for me, it is good enough for my kids"? And that, irrespective of the poster's experience or inclination - liberal or otherwise. Colbert's words referred to in one post are one such example, but there are others to be found in the posters' own opinions.

Surely that is wrong? Surely we want better for our kids, and for their kids, than we had ourselves? And surely that does not only apply to materialistic things only but also to education, attitudes, chances of survival and hapiness.

The fact that we may have "broken the rules" and survived is no bragging matter - or it can become too easily the norm for our kids. I am not moralising, just trying to be pragmatic. And the attitude of "children will be children" can all too easily lead to a washing of the hands. I have seen it in TV interviews of the parents of delinquents, who should have known better. Lessons in parenting? Hell, yes, if it can help our sad state of affairs; and the fact that such lessons are needed at all is an indictment of sorts.

Yes, we are all people, with our feelings and our failings, sometimes easily tempted, and no less lovable for that. But humanity used to have the innate drive for improvement of its lot. Where did that go?

27 Oct 07 - 03:28 PM (#2180569)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: GUEST,Slag

As a moral conservative (as well as the political conservative you've all come to love and adore:) ) I'd rather see someone handing out condums and BC pills than children having abortions, unwanted babies and the life changing hardships an unexpected (?, !!) consequence can bring. I bow to the power of human nature. That drive is what perpetuates the species. If we all had the moral courage, resolve and strength to wait until we were responsible what amazing beings we'd all be. But it aint gonna happen.

Children make mistakes. That's a large part of growing up, making mistakes and hopefully learning from them leads us from innocence to higher innocence. Along with the pills and paraphenallia should come solid correct information about sex, STDs, and responsibilities.

27 Oct 07 - 04:19 PM (#2180588)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Kent Davis

Birth control has been readily available for a long time. Any kid with a quarter could get it from a gas station restroom 35 years ago. Unwanted pregnancies are still occurring.
Last week, I saw two patients who were teen-aged unwed mothers. They both had long been taking birth control pills, or so their mothers thought, when they conceived.
What we, as a culture, have been trying for the last 4 decades hasn't worked. Why would it start working now?
Kent

27 Oct 07 - 06:52 PM (#2180652)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Naemanson

Sex, Drugs, Young People, Permission?

Listen very carefully. They do not need our permission. They do not want our permission. They do not care what we say or do about sex or drugs. They look to each other. Their goal is to "hang" with their friends and do what they want to do. Their goal is to enjoy themselves, listen to their music, party with their friends.

Having said that I should explain my authority. I teach English and Composition to sophomores in a small private Catholic high school in Guam. I start the school year with a talk on honesty and fairness. I explain that if they are honest with me I can be honest with them. We have a very good relationship in the classroom. They feel they can tell me things they would not say to other teachers because I do not criticize or judge them. Consequently I hear it all. At fifteen I do not believe many of the girls in my classes could attract a unicorn (i.e., they are not virgins). They all drink to some extent. Most have used some kind of drugs.

SO, to those who worry that giving condoms to kids is giving permission I would say they are not seeing the forest for the trees. The kids are doing this without our permission. Withholding condoms is just spreading disease and unwanted children and ruining young lives unnecessarily.

27 Oct 07 - 07:13 PM (#2180663)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

Kids are going to smoke and drink regardless, so wouldn't it make more sense to pass out smokes and drinks at school to make them less likely to go buying them in places where they might run into difficult and dangerous situations?

After all, it might even put them off things like that if the authorities seemed to be encouraging them to try them...

28 Oct 07 - 03:41 AM (#2180830)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Naemanson

There is a huge difference between the two, McGrath. They aren't passing out sex and drugs but you seem to advocate that in your post. There is an enormous difference between passing out disease prevention and passing out the disease.

28 Oct 07 - 02:07 PM (#2181107)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: jacqui.c

Too true Brett.

And on the question of condoms - that's fine if the boy will wear one. A lot of lads don't seem to want to and quite often the girls will go along with that just for the attention.

28 Oct 07 - 04:59 PM (#2181206)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Plus, as you mentioned, drugs and alcohol (especially alcohol) are a big part of the teen scene too. And if the kids are really drunk, they're unlikely to remember to put on a condom, and if they do, they'll probably not put it on correctly. A number of posts here have commented on how young girls feel pressured into having sex or losing the boy. I think we need a new approach: 1) try and inculcate some self-respect into these kids so they don't give away what's precious to them to the first emotional blackmailer they have the misfortune to stumble into. 2) try and explain it's alright to say no and mean it, and that a boy that puts a girl under that kind of pressure is no boy'friend'. I accpet of course that that last realistaion often only comes with experience when it's already too late and hearts have been broken etc., But I knew girls when I was a teenager that didn't 'put out' to any old boy who pressured them, and thinking about why I realised it was because they had a high sense of self-worth,they knew they didn't need to offer their bodies to be loved and accepted.
And of course no form of contraceptive is 100 percent proof against either pregnancy or STDs, especially when you factor in the above contexts of alcohol etc. If you take the case of older teenagers and twenty-somethings, who CAN freely access most forms of contraceptive and apparently do, STDs have also shown an alarming rate of increase despite this. But some kids might believe condoms etc., are a sure-fire guarantee against STDs.

28 Oct 07 - 07:59 PM (#2181328)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

Analogies are analogies, not identities. The point I was making with my analogy was that any course of action is likely to have a number of consequences. If you are trying to work out what is the best or least worst option you have to take that into account rather than pick out one and ignore the others.

If you focus exclusively on the goal of reducing the likelihood of young people getting hold of drugs of various sorts (including tobacco and alcoholic drink) from people supplying them illegally, then a policy of providing them directly could make sense. But that would involve ignoring the other consequences of doing this, including what would be interpreted as official encouragement to use the drugs supplied. (My second paragraph was tongue in cheek in this respect.)

The same kind of double effect has to be balanced in the case of schools providing birth control to "middle school kids". On the one hand it can be argued that it increases the likelihood that kids having sex will use contraceptives/prophylactics, reducing the chance of pregnancy or or STDs. On the other hand it can be argued that it might serve to increase the pressures to have sex prematurely, which in practice much of the time woudl be likely to be without making use of effective contraceptives/prophylactics.

There isn't any obvious commonsense way of knowing how the balance of advantage works out between those two consequences. That means people rely on their gut instincts and on their personal experience.

I don't find it too amazing that TRUBIT's son conmes to a conclusion on this basis which TRUBRIT finds amazing - he's in a different situation, seeing different things, and making his judgment on that basis.

And I've no idea where the truth lies, and I doubt if any of us do. Perhaps there has been research that would make the balance of advantage clearer. There clearly needs to be that kind of research as a guide to policy.

29 Oct 07 - 05:42 PM (#2182187)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

As for analogies, here is one famous one by Sanuel Johnson: "Dictionaries are like watches; the worst is better than none, and the best cannot be expected to go quite true."

This would not have been refuted by someone who pointed out, quite correctly, that dictionaries do not as a rule have hands and a clockwork mechanism, and watches are not generally made of paper.

29 Oct 07 - 07:16 PM (#2182260)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: SINSULL

I have to disagree that it is the "Christian thing" to force a 13 year old girl to have her child and help with its support later.
I do not equate a parcel of cells unable to survive outside the womb to a child.
You are all entitled to your opinions - I understand and respect you and your opinions.
But I draw the line at having your opinion enforced by law upon those of us who disagree.
Abortion is not a simple choice. It is not a "quick fix" option. It requires thought and counseling and moral support because a woman or a child woman will have to live with this decision for life.
I know several women who chose abortion for a variety of reasons. None regretted the decision.
I started menstruating at 8 1/2. I could have conceived. It is incomprehensible to me that I should have been forced to carry a child to term at 8 or 9 years old.
Mary

29 Oct 07 - 08:16 PM (#2182312)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Naemanson

Everyone is still approaching the debate from the intellectual and moral high ground. It is not a question of explaining or telling, teaching or offering alternatives. These kids really don't care about our opinions. They will do what they do no matter what we say or do. the best way is to offer positive role models and let them make up their own mind. However, as Trubrit pointed out in her first post there is a paucity of positive role models out there.

29 Oct 07 - 09:25 PM (#2182352)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: john f weldon

A film everyone should see, especially any 19 yr old. Very upsetting. Through a Blue lens.

http://www.nfb.ca/collection/films/fiche/?id=33864

29 Oct 07 - 09:27 PM (#2182354)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Sinsull "I do not equate a parcel of cells unable to survive outside the womb to a child"

But the fact that that 'parcel of cells' is a human life is central to the question. It's been gone over at length in another thread so I won't bore by going over it in detail here. But there are two central planks -
1) every human life is sacred and a God-given gift and we should do what we can to preserve it
2) (the more secular argument) If we allow ourselves to decide that this person or that person is not really a person at all, but some form of outlaw - that is literally, someone outside the protection of the law - it soon becomes a matter of degrees of difference by which ALL our humanity and right to life is undermined.

We can decide that handicapped people are 'not viable' that they are a 'parcel of cells' that are not capable of independent life (without support and care). We can extend that argument to old people, the terminally ill, and so on - basically anyone we like or that's too weak or defenceless to fight back for their rights.

Similar arguements have been used to kill off classes of unwanted people, again I won't bore by going over old details. But it's enough to say if we allow it to happen to others, at the very least we make it harder to explain why it shouldn't happen to us too.

And so instead of protecting the most vulnerable in society, we would victimise them.

If a young girl is pregnant, that is unfortunate and not they way we would wish things, but once it's a fact we can't un-do this (we can terminate the pregnancy, but we cannot un-do what's happened - the creation of a new unique human life). All we can do is try and mitigate events. If the preganancy threatens the life of the young girl, of course, as I already said, abortion is an option. Obviously if the mother is to die, the baby will die too, so it makes no sense to proceed. But if she's capable of carrying the child to full term, then this is what should be done, whether we like it or not. No-one would advocate the death penalty for the boyfriend that got her pregnant, but that's what we advocate for the unborn child if we propose abortion for any reason other than the one I mentioned.

Anyway, I think I'm drifting off-thread again....

29 Oct 07 - 10:51 PM (#2182389)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Kent Davis

Just a reminder that the "amazing converstion" was not about abortion nor about trying to prevent anyone from having access to condoms. It was about a school that is providing birth control to children age 13 and younger.
Birth control has been readily available for a long time. Unwanted pregnancies are still occurring. STDs are still being contracted. Children are still being emotionally and spiritually scarred.
What we, as a culture, have been trying for the last 4 decades hasn't worked. Why would it start working now?
Kent

30 Oct 07 - 06:13 AM (#2182504)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Naemanson

I'll start agreeing with the pro-life people when they start lining up at the clinics to claim the unwanted babies.

Mark Twain once observed that humanity is strong on working for the betterment of mankind... with it's collective mouths. If the pro-life people really want to do something they should come up with an effective program of their own, not just shoot down other people's efforts.

Today in class I discussed this discussion with my students. We had a very interesting conversation. I started with an explanation of what was happening in Maine and the argument that it was giving permission to the kids there. I asked them if they would see this as "permission". They didn't. They see it as concerned adults making sure that kids don't make mistakes that would stay with them for life. We had a lively discussion after that.

In the next period one of my students came in with an eye patch. He was not celebrating Halloween. He and his best friend had been out in the bars and he was injured in a mosh pit incident. He was very drunk at the time. They are fifteen years old. I do not believe anyone gave them permission to drink.

30 Oct 07 - 09:10 AM (#2182579)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

If the pro-life people really want to do something they should come up with an effective program of their own

It sounds as if you're only aware of one variety of "the pro-life people". Whatever the legal situation, there are going to be women for whom pregnancy is a problem and abortion seems to offer a solution. Trying to offer other solutions is something that should unite both those who would identify themselves as pro-choice and those who would identify themselves as pro-life.

There are "pro-life people" who focus their efforts on doing this - offering a real choice of an alternative to abortion to women who might feel they have no other choice. For example.

30 Oct 07 - 06:20 PM (#2182961)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Greg B

I'm always astonished by the 'right to life' types' willingness
to hijack any conversation about reproductive health. Here in
Bucks County PA, they're running protests in front of Planned
Parenthood and not just interfering with women's right to choose
what to do with their own bodies. They're interfering and haranguing
women going in for things like cervical cancer screenings and other
reproductive health screenings and services. So they don't just
hijack the conversations, they are hijacking women's health services.
Guess it makes 'em feel real important.

Look, if you believe that "life begins at conception" then don't
get an abortion. But you can't prove it, no matter how many
little beats of developing hearts you show. So stop sticking your
nose into other people's reproductive organs (don't you think you're
supposed to be married to someone before you stick your nose into her
private parts, anyway?) and finding every possible method, honest and
dishonest, to interfere with her right to do what she chooses
with them, should she happen to believe that "life" begins
with extra-utero viability.

We have the Diocese of Trenton now running radio ads against New
Jersey's stem-cell research ballot initiative. I hope to hell they
lose their tax-exempt status as a result of the campaign.

30 Oct 07 - 08:07 PM (#2183070)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

Naemanson "I'll start agreeing with the pro-life people when they start lining up at the clinics to claim the unwanted babies"

Therein lies one of the ironies of life. There are loads of people / couples who would love to adopt a baby, but find it such a lengthy and deeply bureaucratic task that all but the most determined are put off. If they were to hang around outside the abortion clinics offering to take the unwanted babies, I've no doubt they'd be hustled off by the cops as 'disturbing the peace'!!

Greg B: "I'm always astonished by the 'right to life' types' willingness
to hijack any conversation about reproductive health"

A conversation about birth control doesn't have to be 'hijacked' - the issue of abortion falls under its ambit quite readily.

"Look, if you believe that "life begins at conception" then don't
get an abortion"

I do. I'll try not to - or at least, my wife won't, I hope.

You imply *you* don't believe life begins at conception -

"But you can't prove it, no matter how many
little beats of developing hearts you show"

Odd, then. What kind of animal / cellular structure do those beating little hearts belong to? I think it *has* been proved, scientifically etc., But if you refuse to acknowledge proof there's not much I or anyone can do about it. That's up to you.

"So stop sticking your
nose into other people's reproductive organs (don't you think you're
supposed to be married to someone before you stick your nose into her
private parts, anyway?)"

So you don't agree with pre-marital sex? ;-))

"and finding every possible method, honest and
dishonest, to interfere with her right to do what she chooses
with them, should she happen to believe that "life" begins
with extra-utero viability"

What 'dishonest methods' have I used (assuming you're referring to my arguments)?

"to interfere with her right to do what she chooses
with them"

I am not trying to tell 'her' what to do with them. But once there's a new life there, well that's a different story. It's no longer only 'her' concern. And if I do not respect the right to life of the unborn child, why should I respect the woman's right to choose? Why should I respect anyone's rights for that matter?

Put it another way -

I understand a pregnancy that arrives when you don't want it can be a burden. I've seen it in my own life up close, as I've explained in previous posts. I've known women who kept their kids (and were delighted about it, their children filled their lives after all their apprehensions faded away) and at least one who didn't (and she prefers not to talk about it, so I've never been really sure how she feels about that).

Yes, it can be a burden. But I've seen what lots of positive help and a shoulder to cry on and so on can do to make the situation bearable. On the whole, in the two cases I mentioned above, having the child turned out to be a life-enhancing experience for the women involved. That's what pro-lifers CAN do: offer support, financial help (directly or through taxes etc.,) and so on, to make abortion less attractive an option.

But some people may feel it's just too much to carry (and maybe they're not getting much help from anyone).
But suppose I was a carer looking after a very sick old person. Now that would be a big burden to my life, in some cases a 24 hr job with little support and less thanks. Suppose I live in a place where the state doesn't give much support either, and no 'home' will take this person since I can't afford it.
So, I would be within my rights to kill off this decaying and hardly viable 'collection of cells' (even if it were my own mother and she herself didn't particularly want to go just at the moment) since they couldn't survive without me and medical attention anyway (all those pills) and I deserve a better life.
It's a tough choice, but people should be free to make the call themselves, and society in any case has no responsibility to either party, heck we're all just individuals free to come and go as we like.......right?

30 Oct 07 - 10:16 PM (#2183150)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Kent Davis

Let's see if I've got this straight.
Your 12-year-old asks me for birth control pills. I decide whether or not she gets them. You don't decide. You have no say in the matter. I can give her the pills no matter what you think. After all, I'm the doctor. You think that's a good thing. Am I right so far?
What if I decide she doesn't get them? You want her to have them, but I don't. You have no say in the matter. I can keep her from getting the pills no matter what you think. After all, I'm the doctor. Right?
If not, why not?

Kent Davis

30 Oct 07 - 11:00 PM (#2183188)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: maeve

People are lined up to adopt unwanted babies. I'm one of them. The irony is that there aren't enough babies for all those who want them, and many of those who want them (or older children) don't have the thousands of dollars needed.

This is an area that's ripe for improvement in which all of us could make a difference (dare I say it?) by working together. Donate money to help someone to adopt an infant,children, or teen. Provide housing for a woman or girl in need of shelter, thereby allowing her to give birth to her child and to make an informed decision to keep her child or to allow someone ready to adopt to raise her baby? Use your time and talent to help make physical improvements to potential foster and adoptive homes. Help someone with the never ending paperwork. Train social workers to better cope with the demands of the job in an effective way. Act to streamline the process of adoption in your town/state/country.

There are no "Pro Abortionists" or "Right-to-Lifers" in my world. There are people in need and there are people who can offer some kind of help. Either situation can and will change without notice. Kindness and patience from each makes a hard world that much more joyful.

Now, could we please either return to the thread's original topic as posed by TruBrit, and informed by the newer legal developments in the Portland case, or close up shop and make some music?

Warm regards to you all,

maeve.

31 Oct 07 - 12:46 AM (#2183226)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Naemanson

Sounds to me like the efforts of pro-life and pro-choice alike should be made to streamline the adoption process. Unfortunately the streamlined process will mean kids going to people who should not have them. What do you do about that?

I've heard the argument that an aborted kid could be a future Einstein. Unfortunately S/he could be a future Jeffrey Daumer or Hitler. Bad argument.

I believe every woman has the right to make her own decisions. I agree that life starts when the child starts to form but I do not believe that stopping that life is evil or wrong. Life and death are part of our existence. Stopping a life before it becomes self aware is not cruel. Sentencing a woman to life as a single mother before she is able to live freely is cruel.

This is one of those issues that people react to on a visceral level. Therefore there is no answer.

31 Oct 07 - 07:12 AM (#2183330)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: maeve

Please- Could we move on?

maeve

31 Oct 07 - 10:10 PM (#2183943)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

Maeve -- not sure if I should say this but I hope your time will come when you can adopt. Have you considered fostering? There are so many examples of foster parents being able to adopt their foster children over time....

A big hug!

31 Oct 07 - 10:56 PM (#2183969)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

many of those who want them (or older children) don't have the thousands of dollars needed.

I don't get that - I know it costs money to look after any child, but surely you don't actually have to pay to adopt?

01 Nov 07 - 09:07 AM (#2184186)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: maeve

OK: massive thread drift, and then I'm out of here.

McGrath and TruBrit- Thank you for asking. Yes, it can be painfully expensive to adopt, even via the foster-to-adopt program. In a standard (non-foster care) adoption there are many charges to cover: administrative costs, home studies, legal fees, and depending on the state laws in the US, certain birth parent expenses may be billed to the potential adoptive parent(s) as well. Foreign adoptions are dramatically more expensive, and include more paperwork, more legal fees, and sometimes, bribes under the guise of gifts of money or supplies. Out of pocket expenses may range from 10-30 thousand US dollars or more. In the US there is a partial tax credit available for adoptive parents, but it is a credit- not a refund of money spent, and thus can't be used to actually pay for one's expenses. This does not mean that most adoptions involve "buying" a child, it means that adoption is simply not available for many who would be excellent and capable parents, and many splendid infants, children, and teens must wait for adoptions that may never occur. I've been working on this for years.

Adoption through the Foster-to Adopt programs in various states still requires a home study which may be free in itself, but there are certain requirements for the house itself that must be met before a home study can be approved. On the face of it, it is good and reasonable to have a high standard to protect the children involved. In reality, that can mean a huge expense to replace or install specified doors and windows, add new electrical wiring, remove rather than stabilize lead paint, change the heating system, etc. We have a wonderful old house. To meet the requirements we must do all of the repairs at once, rather than a few each year. Before the required changes can be made, other non-required but necessary repairs must come first. We pay for that. Nothing in our 200 year old home is a hazard, but it doesn't meet the expectations for new construction. Our home is paid for, we are warm in the winter, we eat well and raise many of our own veggies, fruits, and eggs. We are hardworking, loving, and well-prepared to be parents. Our cash flow is minimal.

Paperwork, including collection of personal information, gathering referrals, copying fees, further legal research, paperwork which has been lost or filled out incorrectly by overburdened, poorly trained, burned out, or antagonistic social workers (and there are many wonderful social workers, too!) are a further headache.

Add to the mix widely varying requirements from country to country, state to state, county to county, and even office to office. Stir in the emotional and psychological exhaustion. Pound in too many questions dealing with too many personal subjects. Now, sit and read the newspaper accounts about the many children who are neglected or abused, or just look around your community at the children who are continually returned to dangerous homes with scary adults.

Foster to adopt programs look great on the surface, and perhaps some are as good as they look. Underneath, however, potential adoptive parents must make the same changes to their homes and lives, learn to love and care for children who in many cases have been terribly damaged, and remember that the function of the foster care system is to reunite families, not support adoption. Most children in foster care are not really available for adoption, and quite a few will never be released. Your social worker may or may not make that clear.

So I get a wee bit testy when people I otherwise respect identify abortion as being the way to deal with unwanted children. I am tired beyond exhaustion of being told that the life that results from the fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm is something other than human. I am horrified by the view that it's better to cut out that fetus than make life harder for the mother. Life is hard. An unplanned pregnancy can make it much harder. Our response to the hard times determines the overall quality of our lives.

I am a private person. I have too much respect for the people who have posted, and value children too much to not speak up. Friends who are really interested in a conversation about these hard issues are welcome to PM me. Otherwise, warm regards to all who have struggled with the hard choices discussed in this thread. Let there be no condemnation between us.

maeve

01 Nov 07 - 09:33 AM (#2184195)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

A very very different system there from the one in the UK, and I think in most European countries, I'm glad to say from our point of view, though not from yours. (Here's a link to the British Association for Adoption and Fostering - incidentally next week is their 10th annual National Adoption Week.)

It does seem to me that for anyone concerned about these matters, whether they call themselves pro-choice or pro-life, one thing they'd be committed to do would be to fight to get rid of those kinds of barriers to adoption, as well as trying to reduce the social and financial pressures that can make talk of "choice" a mockery.

01 Nov 07 - 09:37 AM (#2184200)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

That link seems to have gone missing. Strange - it showed up OK in the preview. Here it is again: British Association for Adoption and Fostering

01 Nov 07 - 04:52 PM (#2184514)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: robomatic

We are dealing with the products of biological 'success' of our species, having increased to large numbers and still with plenty of high quality food to eat with little or no effort. Our females are coming into estrus at younger ages which we have traditionally not regarded as reproductive years, though (now) they are.

What I think we can all agree on is that it is desirable to control the act of reproduction until the reproduced are to be supplied with the caretaking and sustenance they require.

Accordingly it is a no brainer that those capable of reproducing be given the tools and information they require, along with that nifty anti-virus that guaran-damn-ties that our young women be free throughout their lives of a very nasty cancer.

01 Nov 07 - 06:39 PM (#2184588)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Nickhere

But I believe there's plenty of food in the world, enough to feed everyone well. Whole villages in France starved to death in the 1700s but this kind of thing no longer happens in the West anyway. Up to recently, we all heard of the 'lakes of wine', 'mountains of butter' pools of milk in the EU - the results of over-production of food that no-one knew what to do with without tinkering with the make-belief economy. Harvest yields have never been higher. The real probelm is distribution - and politics. Ironically, population control is being advocated mainly for the so-called Third World, whereas, despite those regiosn high populations, it is often the West that has some of the highest densities of population (think of Holland for example). I admit China's population is high, as is India's but those countries are also vast. there are huge uninhabited expanses in China, especially in Western China. We are all in a position to supply the reproduced with EVERYTHING they need, if we are just willing to share a little of the surplus we have. Dig in your pockets (and me in mine) and give to a charity, sponsor a child (or two) in a developing country to ensure they get fed and an education and a future, and that their parents are not reduced to indentured labour or worse to support their children.


(As an aside, GM companies would now like to foist their products on the Third World as a supposed solution to their food shortages, even though there's already enough food. Plus any nation that makes itself more dependent on GM companies' products will find itself more desperate and dependent than ever, as plants are engineered to die after one one harvest, die without the expensive fertilises - coincidentally also produced by GM companies - and find themselevs exposed to lawsuits if they attempt to harvest the seed. Far from solving the Third World's food problems, they are sure to aggravate them further).

01 Nov 07 - 06:40 PM (#2184590)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: maeve

robomatic said, "guaran-damn-ties that our young women be free throughout their lives of a very nasty cancer."

Unfortunately, it doesn't guarantee any such thing.

maeve

01 Nov 07 - 08:57 PM (#2184674)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: McGrath of Harlow

"...it is a no brainer that those capable of reproducing be given the tools and information they require"

It just isn't that simple. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, while it is of course quite possible that passing out contraceptives/prophylactics to very young teenagers might have the desired effect, more especially for some individuals, it is also quite possible that it could in fact have the reverse effect for the age group in question.

This isn't the kind of issue where commonsense and guesswork can settle the question. It definitely isn't a "no brainer".

01 Nov 07 - 09:46 PM (#2184716)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

This may be thread drift too but what the hell. As a broker (real estate) I was recently involved in a sale representing the seller. The buyer was qualified through a subsidized program and I am philosophically all in favor of this .......BUT the terms that were set by the lender to meet the low income program were ludicrous.....including, as Maeve commented, removinglead paint, fixing windows, - fixing things that the seller (my client ) just didn't see as a problem AT ALL. By the time we had finiished with the deal, with the government agency coming back time and time again to inspect improvements that in 99% of our homes we would just grin and bear it about finished my sympathy for the program......

10 Nov 07 - 07:06 AM (#2190406)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: JohnInKansas

Although the thread has drifted from the original subject, one of many comments on the original thought - drugs in schools - appeared quite recently. The story is "anecdotal" and doesn't really say much that's verifiable about the prevalence of drugs; but it's perhaps worth a quick read, just to see the kind of people who get into drugs in the lower grades.

HEROIN DRUG TARGETS MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS

John

10 Nov 07 - 04:58 PM (#2190707)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: TRUBRIT

Oh my heavens........

14 Nov 07 - 08:32 PM (#2193978)
Subject: RE: BS: Amazing conversation with a 19 yr. old..
From: Desert Dancer

Emerging Answers 2007: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce the Problems of Teen Pregnancy and Sexually Transmitted Disease, a report from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy

Report: Abstinence Programs Don't Work, Washington Post, about that report

Teen sex-ed programs backed, Washington Times, about that report

From the Washington Post summary:

"At present there does not exist any strong evidence that any abstinence program delays the initiation of sex, hastens the return to abstinence or reduces the number of sexual partners" among teenagers, the study concluded.

The study found that while abstinence-only efforts appear to have little positive impact, more comprehensive sex education programs were having "positive outcomes" including teenagers "delaying the initiation of sex, reducing the frequency of sex, reducing the number of sexual partners and increasing condom or contraceptive use."

"Two-thirds of the 48 comprehensive programs that supported both abstinence and the use of condoms and contraceptives for sexually active teens had positive behavior effect," said the report.

---

From a Tucson Citizen's columnist (Denogean: Balanced plan for sex ed tops abstinence-only):

Researcher Doug Kirby reviewed the scientific evaluations of 115 sex ed programs of both the abstinence-only and comprehensive (addressing both abstinence and contraceptives use) variety.

Two-thirds of the comprehensive sex ed programs showed a positive effect on teen sexual behavior, either delaying the initiation of sex or increasing the use of contraceptives, or both.

Debunking the myth that such programs encourage teens to become sexually active, there is no evidence that any of the programs hastened the initiation of sex or increased the frequency of it. Even making condoms available at school clinics didn't make teenagers more likely to have sex.

The best programs send clear and consistent messages about sex and contraceptive use, Kirby said. They talk explicitly about sex and contraceptives, identify specific situations that might lead to unwanted or unprotected sex and involve practicing saying no to sex or insisting on contraceptive use.

Regarding abstinence-only programs, Kirby found that very few of these programs that receive millions in federal dollars have been subject to a rigorous scientific evaluation of their effectiveness. Of those that have, there's no strong evidence that the programs delay the initiation of sex, lead sexually active teens to return to abstinence or reduce a teen's number of sexual partners.

Kirby said he couldn't say all abstinence-only programs don't work because of the scarcity of studies. He said, however, that those studied and found to have no positive impact were chosen for evaluation because they were viewed as the most promising abstinence-only programs.

[She also points out:]
Despite the lack of evidence for it, the federal government has cold-shouldered comprehensive sex ed and primarily funded abstinence-only sex ed since 1996. It is spending $176 million on such programs in fiscal 2007 and plans to spend $204 million in fiscal 2008.

Since 1996, taxpayers have paid $1.5 billion for abstinence-only programs when you add in the matching dollars states are required to put up to get the federal funding, Boonstra [of the Guttmacher Institute] said.