NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/WomensHealth/story?id=3739973&page=1
Parents and school officials are preparing to battle tonight in a debate about the sexual health of children at one Maine school district.

Administrators at a Portland middle school are considering a bold proposal that would allow students to access a broader range of contraceptives from the school's health center.
Related Stories

King Middle School's health center already provides condoms as part of its reproductive health program, implemented after five of the 135 students who visited the center last year reported being sexually active.

Honestly, I'm somewhat concerned about the chemicals being available, but I suppose if they aren't prescription, it's alright. I can also see how a lot of anti-birth control conservatives will react.

"They shouldn't be having secks and if they do, they deserve to have aids babies!!!"

in 3...
2...

lol all the coolest kids are at it, they need the pill or there will be loads of bambinoes

Birth control should be available, free of charge, to any young person who wants it. It is a wonderful idea to have contraception available at school, since that will allow kids a viable option that doesn't involve asking Mom and Pop.

My only concern is that if these young women are going to be taking something like the birth control pill then they should consult with a medical professional first.

How oddly progressive. I guess they're realising that more sound sexual education policy is the way to go and that teenagers are going to have sex either way. Making contraceptives easily accessible at least ensures their safety.

Good habits are developed at a young age. Taking a birth control pill from a young age won't hurt the girls. Taking the pill will become second nature for them.

They should be checked first by a medical professional and have the dosage adjusted if need be. Some may not respond well to a pill that has a high level of oestrogen in it.

How oddly progressive. I guess they're realising that more sound sexual education policy is the way to go and that teenagers are going to have sex either way. Making contraceptives easily accessible at least ensures their safety.

Yes but you have to realize everyone has different priorities. For example a lot of individuals in this country believe that sex is generally bad, especially before marriage, and especially involving teenagers (and possibly homosexuality!), so that it is important for them to try to cut down on the fucking rate. To do so they may well try a policy of denying contraceptives on the theory that without access to them, people will refrain from having sex out of fear of pregnancy or disease.

Needless to say that's not much of a good policy.

whay age ar middleschool kids?

whay age ar middleschool kids?

According to the article, 11-13 (14?). Puberty for girls does begin sooner than it does for boys (at least typically).

Middle school? Isn't that a bit young?

Yes but you have to realize everyone has different priorities. For example a lot of individuals in this country believe that sex is generally bad, especially before marriage, and especially involving teenagers (and possibly homosexuality!), so that it is important for them to try to cut down on the fucking rate. To do so they may well try a policy of denying contraceptives on the theory that without access to them, people will refrain from having sex out of fear of pregnancy or disease.

Needless to say that's not much of a good policy.

That's true. But why endanger the younger people because of antiquated ideas? Denying safe means for younger people to have sex will not cut down on it.

Abstinence-only sex ed yields the same number of sexually active teens that does comprehensive sex ed. Too bad the more conservative individuals have a hard time realising this.

Middle school? Isn't that a bit young?
Not according to the story. "King Middle School's health center already provides condoms as part of its reproductive health program, implemented after five of the 135 students who visited the center last year reported being sexually active."

I'd say it's better to make sure kids know about contraception and birth control BEFORE they become sexually active, don't you?

Like little girls need another medication to be dependent on. Condoms are fine, birth control pills are not.

Not according to the story. "King Middle School's health center already provides condoms as part of its reproductive health program, implemented after five of the 135 students who visited the center last year reported being sexually active."

I'd say it's better to make sure kids know about contraception and birth control BEFORE they become sexually active, don't you?
Hmmm, that makes sense.

Gosh, what are middle schoolers doing doing it?

They ought to hand in boxes of condoms for free instead.

Birth control pills are all swell and good to avoid teenage pregnancy, but you don't want those kids to start up their sex life by picking up the bait of having unprotected sex, now do you?

Because birth control pills are phail against HIV and all the other sexually-transmitted infections.

honestly, I don't like the idea. Not because I don't think they should have contraceptives, but because the pill doesn't protect against STD's. I would worry that the girls would say "Oh, I'm on the pill, it's fine" and therefore not use a condom

Is the school going to take full accountability/responsibility for the non-parental authorized medications it gives the kids?

It just shows how far down society has gone that hellbound agents of Satan have now decided to corrupt innocent girls by helping them to engage in fornication. Women should only have birth control if their husbands ask them to.

I think it's a good idea, they already provide condoms btw.

The students will need a parent's written permission to access any services provided, but they would not have to disclose which service they receive, a point of contention for some.

wouldn't that kind of beat the purpose, I mean, can't they just ask their parents for contraceptives if they have to ask them for permission either way?

Is the school going to take full accountability/responsibility for the non-parental authorized medications it gives the kids?
"The students will need a parent's written permission to access any services provided" according to the article. They don't have to specify which of the services they are receiving, but their parents must consent for them to use the repro health services. If a parent has an objection to their kid being on the Pill, they'd have plenty of time to say so before signing that form.

wouldn't that kind of beat the purpose, I mean, can't they just ask their parents for contraceptives if they have to ask them for permission either way?
Reproductive health care includes a lot more than just contraception. If a kid gets permission to use the clinic, that doesn't necessarily mean they're seeking contraception.

Ideally, all kids would feel like they could ask their parents for contraception and for reproductive health care advice. But we don't live in Ideally.

honestly, I don't like the idea. Not because I don't think they should have contraceptives, but because the pill doesn't protect against STD's. I would worry that the girls would say "Oh, I'm on the pill, it's fine" and therefore not use a condom
Dude, they don't just fling the Pill at girls and send them on their merry way. ANY reputable health care professional will be very, very clear about the fact that the Pill and Patch protect against pregnancy but not STDs.

Like little girls need another medication to be dependent on. Condoms are fine, birth control pills are not.
Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that you've never been on the Pill...

Dude, they don't just fling the Pill at girls and send them on their merry way. ANY reputable health care professional will be very, very clear about the fact that the Pill and Patch protect against pregnancy but not STDs.

Yes, I both know and understand that. What I am saying is that we are talking about 11-14 year olds. I know 21 year olds who have the exact thought process I stated...a significant amount of the risk of sex is removed with the pill, but there is still a risk. This, in my experience, is one that more people are willing to take

Yes, the pill is more reliable against pregnancy. I, personally, would prefer good protection against both STI's and pregnancy instead.

Am I for this move? Yes. Do I think providing condoms would be slightly better? Yes. Or, in an ideal situation, do both.

Reproductive health care includes a lot more than just contraception. If a kid gets permission to use the clinic, that doesn't necessarily mean they're seeking contraception.

Ideally, all kids would feel like they could ask their parents for contraception and for reproductive health care advice. But we don't live in Ideally.

aha, i thought they had to ask their parents permission to get contraceptives.

Yes, I both know and understand that. What I am saying is that we are talking about 11-14 year olds. I know 21 year olds who have the exact thought process I stated...a significant amount of the risk of sex is removed with the pill, but there is still a risk. This, in my experience, is one that more people are willing to take

Yes, there are some stupid and/or ignorant people in the world. I'm not seeing how LESS education and LESS information and LESS access to safe contraception is going to help with that.

Indeed, what you say seems to support the idea that we need to familiarize people with contraceptive options sooner and more thoroughly, so that they know what the benefits, costs, and limitations of all their options may be.


Yes, the pill is more reliable against pregnancy. I, personally, would prefer good protection against both STI's and pregnancy instead.

Am I for this move? Yes. Do I think providing condoms would be slightly better? Yes. Or, in an ideal situation, do both.
Read the article. The repro health center already provides condoms.

Yes, there are some stupid and/or ignorant people in the world. I'm not seeing how LESS education and LESS information and LESS access to safe contraception is going to help with that.I'm in no way arguing for less education or less information, or even less access. What I am arguing is that the primary emphasis for this age group should be placed on condoms

Indeed, what you say seems to support the idea that we need to familiarize people with contraceptive options sooner and more thoroughly, so that they know what the benefits, costs, and limitations of all their options may be.
Without question. Sadly, current legislation pretty thoroughly thwarts that.

Read the article. The repro health center already provides condoms.It does, yes. But it seems to me that they are planning to emphasize the pill, whereas I would prefer the emphasis placed on something that prevents STI's

Woo!
Now if they'd just start teaching REAL Sex Ed in schools as opposed to this abstinence only BS.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/WomensHealth/story?id=3739973&page=1


Honestly, I'm somewhat concerned about the chemicals being available, but I suppose if they aren't prescription, it's alright. I can also see how a lot of anti-birth control conservatives will react.

You can't stop them from having sex. Doing this will lower abortion rates, and thus make more conservatives happy.

if they are seeking birth control then they are, more likely than not, seeking to have sex. If they are seeking to have sex, they, more likely than not, will have sex when the opportunity presents itself so it's best if they have these things available to them.

It does, yes. But it seems to me that they are planning to emphasize the pill, whereas I would prefer the emphasis placed on something that prevents STI's

Why not put emphasis on both? Put it on pills for the girls and condoms for the boys? You know, encourage good habits in both genders from a young age.

Well with these policies being implemented in more and more progressive liberal areas resulting in lower teen pregnancies, we'll see the same ol' same ol' high teen pregnancy rates in the abstinence only conservative areas. It'll be great for statistical analysis to prove the effectiveness, but bad for the kids born to those ignorant teens.

A very good idea, hopefully this will lead down a road to all contracpetives and condoms being free to everyone.

Did any of you have sex at that age?

Did any of you have sex at that age?

26-year old virgin here.

Did any of you have sex at that age?


Yes but it was with another boy.

Yes but it was with a boy.

Are you saying you are gay?

Are you saying you are gay?


Nope, I'm only half gay.

Nope, I'm only half gay.

How can you be half gay? Be one or the other.

It just shows how far down society has gone that hellbound agents of Satan have now decided to corrupt innocent girls by helping them to engage in fornication. Women should only have birth control if their husbands ask them to.


Woah~ o-o you're still here! You disappeared so suddenly yesterday I thought for sure you'd been banned!

Anywho~

Birth control = good
Sex ed = good

Birth control for middle school girls... WTF?!I wish I could make that bigger without seeming obscenely adolecant, but come on! When did it become common for girls that young to be sexually active? Know what I think would be better than birth control? Fucking attentive parents! Do you know who's bed -your- 11 year old is sleeping in tonight? The thought makes me shudder.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/WomensHealth/story?id=3739973&page=1


Honestly, I'm somewhat concerned about the chemicals being available, but I suppose if they aren't prescription, it's alright. I can also see how a lot of anti-birth control conservatives will react.

Hmmmmm. I am a pretty big proponent of readily available contraception but somehow this is a poorly thought out way of solving the problem. It is my understanding that all birth control pills are prescription only. I think this is the case because there are risk factors that make different prescriptions better for different women. I think that there are some bc pills that should not be used by smokers. I am not sure but I bet that some should not be used by women with endocrine problems.

If the school health center at this school has a physician, then my concerns are moot. However, if the school nurse is handing the things out like candy this sounds pretty dangerous.

Contraception in schools is a great idea. I think we would all be surprised how many wierd parents are out there that make kids afraid to tell them that they are having sex. Unfortunately, most of these bizarro parents are probably fellow Republicans. They make us all look bad. These folks represent a crazy minority of us, please do not judge us all by the antics of these loonies.

Know what I think would be better than birth control? Fucking attentive parents! Do you know who's bed -your- 11 year old is sleeping in tonight? The thought makes me shudder.

Agreed, that would be the best form of birth control. Problem is, the parents of these children often don't care. I have a 12 year old sister, and the thought of her sleeping with someone a year ago...? Its wrong, plain and simple.

Giving these kids birth control pills is only going to encourage kids who hadn't been sexually active in the past, to experiment, and becoming so. The kids who were sexually active in the first place would probably not use it; "I've had no problems with sex in the past, why would I need this?" Before you say that they would be more assertive than that; we are talking about 11 year olds. Hell, we are talking about sexually active 11 year olds... They aren't going to be little Einstein's are they...

Agreed, that would be the best form of birth control. Problem is, the parents of these children often don't care. I have a 12 year old sister, and the thought of her sleeping with someone a year ago...? Its wrong, plain and simple.

Giving these kids birth control pills is only going to encourage kids who hadn't been sexually active in the past, to experiment, and becoming so. The kids who were sexually active in the first place would probably not use it; "I've had no problems with sex in the past, why would I need this?" Before you say that they would be more assertive than that; we are talking about 11 year olds. Hell, we are talking about sexually active 11 year olds... They aren't going to be little Einstein's are they...

There is no relationship between sexual activity and intelligence. People devellop at different rates. All people should be encouraged to be comfortable with themselves. It is not our choice to tell our children when they are ready to have sex. We should be there to counsel them and recommend and help them receive the contraception of their and their physician's choosing, not to regulate such a private part of their lives.

Reproductive rights are a fundamental human right. It is for this reason that the Supreme Court has struck down contraception bans.

Giving these kids birth control pills is only going to encourage kids who hadn't been sexually active in the past, to experiment, and becoming so.

Why would it? I know plenty of girls who got on the pill early on in life. None were like, "WOOT! I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE SEX YET, BUT NOW I WILL CUZ I GOTS DA PILL!"

There is no relationship between sexual activity and intelligence. People devellop at different rates. All people should be encouraged to be comfortable with themselves. It is not our choice to tell our children when they are ready to have sex. We should be there to counsel them and recommend and help them receive the contraception of their and their physician's choosing, not to regulate such a private part of their lives.

Reproductive rights are a fundamental human right. It is for this reason that the Supreme Court has struck down contraception bans.


And until the little fuckers are 18, parents are their guardians and have the responsibility of regulating what their child does with their body. Yes, people develop at different rates, but that doesn't mean that their parents should just sigh and shake their heads and give the "there's nothing I can do" tired responce. I don't believe sex is safe physically or emotionally in children that young, and I think it ought to be STRONGLY discouraged by parents, teachers and society.

I'm not saying deny them birth control, I'm saying try and find out why so many kids are sexually active. I know I'm not the only one who finds that freakishly disturbing.

Why not put emphasis on both? Put it on pills for the girls and condoms for the boys? You know, encourage good habits in both genders from a young age.
Would make sense. But I'd say encourage condoms on both genders.
How can you be half gay? Be one or the other.

The other half is an alien. Or he's bi. Ya know...whichever.

Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that you've never been on the Pill...

How many males do you know are on the pill?

How many males do you know are on the pill?

A few that are slowly turning into females because of it?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/WomensHealth/story?id=3739973&page=1


Honestly, I'm somewhat concerned about the chemicals being available, but I suppose if they aren't prescription, it's alright. I can also see how a lot of anti-birth control conservatives will react.

Birth control pills are available by prescription. IF the underage child has seen their doctor, and IF their doctor has prescribed this medication, and IF the parent has signed a consent form saying, "Yes, I know my daughter will be taking this medication and the risks (stroke, blood clots, high blood pressure and heart attack being possible but unlikely at her age)" then I have no problem with the school providing it and making sure the kids take it properly.

To provide a prescription with potentially dangerous side effects without the parent's consent to a middle schooler would be downright negligent.

Curious, has anyone ever done a study on the effects of birth control on such young children?

I would never let my children get birth control so soon. I would mostly be concerned about the potential health effects. Alternative birth control? Perhaps. But not the pill form.

So schools would be allowed to hand out birth control but not Advil or Tylenol?

You're telling MIDDLE SCHOOLERS that it's okay to have unprotected sex. They need to learn responsibility and respect first. Members of the opposite sex are just pieces of meat, and the newer generations are losing sight of that. Sex, drugs, alchohol - and they wonder why when it comes time to go out on their own they fail miserably. So what do they do? They come crying for money from people who decided to live their life the right way when they were young. I mean, there's a point of ridiculous, you think we might be crossing it here?

Um.. Birth control pills, from the school and not the mother/father, for 10 to 12 year olds! Somebody there has lost it... big time!


but you don't want those kids to start up their sex life by picking up the bait of having unprotected sex, now do you?

Because birth control pills are phail against HIV and all the other sexually-transmitted infections.
DING! DING! DING!

Like little girls need another medication to be dependent on. Condoms are fine, birth control pills are not.

Little girls have periods, in some cases they bleed for 14 days out of 28 leading to anaemia, experience projectile vomiting for a couple of days a month and cramps worse than appendicitis pain. Condoms don't stop that.

Extreme I know but I was one of those little girls and the only thing that eased the symptoms was the pill. I had to wait until I was 17 to get it because my parents didn't want their little girl taking contraceptive pills. I dread to think how much education I missed because I was driven home by a teacher for vomiting in class, or when I was there how much I missed because all I could think about was the pin in my gut or I was there but spaced out on antiemetics.

Of course the pill came in handy for other things.

I've got know problem with this, if it's a private school. Public schools, funded by public money, should not be allowed to use the working family's tax dollars to fund some teen love affair.

Bah! You call birth control pills controversial? That's so eighties!

You want controversial, how about if schools promote teen homosexuality as birth control? Now THAT is controversy! :)

How many males do you know are on the pill?
So when you say that the birth control pill isn't "fine," you say this without any personal experience whatsoever on the subject. Just checking.

Little girls have periods, in some cases they bleed for 14 days out of 28 leading to anaemia, experience projectile vomiting for a couple of days a month and cramps worse than appendicitis pain. Condoms don't stop that.

Extreme I know but I was one of those little girls and the only thing that eased the symptoms was the pill. I had to wait until I was 17 to get it because my parents didn't want their little girl taking contraceptive pills. I dread to think how much education I missed because I was driven home by a teacher for vomiting in class, or when I was there how much I missed because all I could think about was the pin in my gut or I was there but spaced out on antiemetics.

Of course the pill came in handy for other things.
I also went on the Pill long before I was sexually active, for unrelated medical reasons. I know plenty of other young women who did so as well.

Yet another reason why people who don't know a thing about the Pill should probably not bother trying to talk about it. :D

Giving these kids birth control pills is only going to encourage kids who hadn't been sexually active in the past, to experiment, and becoming so. The kids who were sexually active in the first place would probably not use it; "I've had no problems with sex in the past, why would I need this?"
I'd like to see some numbers on this. Can you please provide evidence to support your claims?

Please keep in mind that anecdotes or blind assumptions about young people's sex lives will not help you. I went on the Pill before I was sexually active, and didn't become sexually active for several YEARS afterward. My desire to have sex did not change as a result of going on the Pill. So I'm a "counter anecdote" that nullifies any of your assumptions, and you can now move on to presenting real evidence.

Bah! You call birth control pills
You want controversial, how about if schools promote teen homosexuality as birth control? Now THAT is controversy! :)
Why can't you just watch porn and have a joint like the rest of us.

How can you be half gay? Be one or the other.
His left half is gay, his right half is a robot.
Bah! You call birth control pills controversial? That's so eighties!

You want controversial, how about if schools promote teen homosexuality as birth control? Now THAT is controversy! :)

Ladies and Gentlemen, the infinite font of wisdom that is LG.


Also, post again so your post count will have 666 in it! FTW!

Bah! You call birth control pills controversial? That's so eighties!

You want controversial, how about if schools promote teen homosexuality as birth control? Now THAT is controversy! :)

Is that going to be your first act of God? ;)

So schools would be allowed to hand out birth control but not Advil or Tylenol?

You're telling MIDDLE SCHOOLERS that it's okay to have unprotected sex. They need to learn responsibility and respect first. Members of the opposite sex are just pieces of meat, and the newer generations are losing sight of that. Sex, drugs, alchohol - and they wonder why when it comes time to go out on their own they fail miserably. So what do they do? They come crying for money from people who decided to live their life the right way when they were young. I mean, there's a point of ridiculous, you think we might be crossing it here?
No, they are being told sex is bad and evil and are not being taught about contraception, and that is the problem.

Some freaked out upholder of justice and all that is good on the Today show this morning seemed to imply as her last statement that the birth control pill, when provided to middle schoolers, would encourage pregnancy. This is the kind of shit we have to deal with in the US.

You're telling MIDDLE SCHOOLERS that it's okay to have unprotected sex.
Wrong.
They need to learn responsibility and respect first.
Eh, no. How to have sex safely should be the first thing one learns after learning what sex is. Responsibility and respect are important, but they won't prevent pregnancy or STIs.
Members of the opposite sex are just pieces of meat, and the newer generations are losing sight of that.
What?
rant about how young people all fail

*yawn*

You're telling MIDDLE SCHOOLERS that it's okay to have unprotected sex.

Wait, let me get this straight:

By making contraception more available to young people, we are encouraging them to have unprotected sex?

Is this like how providing free bike helmets makes kids more likely to ride their bikes without a helmet?


They need to learn responsibility and respect first.

Why would you assume they aren't learning those things? Why would being able to access safe contraceptive options preclude a responsible and respectful attitude?


Members of the opposite sex are just pieces of meat, and the newer generations are losing sight of that.

I would hope they are. Why would you want young people to view members of the opposite sex as piece of meat?


Sex, drugs, alchohol - and they wonder why when it comes time to go out on their own they fail miserably.

Teen drug use has been on the decline for years. Teen pregnancy rates, too. Teens are more likely to practice safe sex today than they have ever been before.

So really, the numbers suggest that young people today are MORE responsible than the teens of the previous generation.

But don't let fact get in the way of your little rant. Perhaps next you can explain the dangers of rock music?

OOh, ooh, and violent video games.

And how D&D is teaching children how to summon demons.

:rolleyes:

OOh, ooh, and violent video games.

And how D&D is teaching children how to summon demons.

:rolleyes:

Amusing factoid that I can't back up cos I don't remember where I saw it:
The number of violent crimes by youths has been falling since about the time DOOM was released.

OOh, ooh, and violent video games.

And how D&D is teaching children how to summon demons.

:rolleyes:

I thought it was Harry Potter that was teaching about witchcraft. :p and the summoning of demons...

I thought it was Harry Potter that was teaching about witchcraft. :p and the summoning of demons...

Potter's just the new kid on the block. D&D had a monopoly on corrupting the youth in the 80s and early 90s.

I've got know problem with this, if it's a private school. Public schools, funded by public money, should not be allowed to use the working family's tax dollars to fund some teen love affair.

You'd rather have the state allow the unwanted pregnancy, then pay welfare for the kid and spend much more of your money?

How can you be half gay? Be one or the other.

I'm about 27% gay. *nod*

Potter's just the new kid on the block. D&D had a monopoly on corrupting the youth in the 80s and early 90s.

A +2 Game of Corruption.

Is that going to be your first act of God? ;)

No. My first act of God will be to erase Jerusalem from existence. That crust of dirt has annyed me long enough.

But I suspect it won't take long for people to find out that as God, I don't care who people boink. I have bigger fish to fry. *nod*

Why can't you just watch porn and have a joint like the rest of us.

Too busy playing with people's heads. *nod*

I'm about 27% gay. *nod*

The question is, which 27%?

The question is, which 27%?

Doesnt really matter because I'm 100% married. :p

I'd like to see some numbers on this. Can you please provide evidence to support your claims?

Please keep in mind that anecdotes or blind assumptions about young people's sex lives will not help you. I went on the Pill before I was sexually active, and didn't become sexually active for several YEARS afterward. My desire to have sex did not change as a result of going on the Pill. So I'm a "counter anecdote" that nullifies any of your assumptions, and you can now move on to presenting real evidence.

That just shows that you were desperate but no one was interested in you.

Anyway, since when does the weird pattern that you went through with birth control nulify what I said?

Is this like how providing free bike helmets makes kids more likely to ride their bikes without a helmet?



Same as, say...

Providing children with shiny new bike helmets might encourage them to ride their bike? A new computer game might encourage them to play on their computer? I'd say so.

Birth control pills are available by prescription. IF the underage child has seen their doctor, and IF their doctor has prescribed this medication, and IF the parent has signed a consent form saying, "Yes, I know my daughter will be taking this medication and the risks (stroke, blood clots, high blood pressure and heart attack being possible but unlikely at her age)" then I have no problem with the school providing it and making sure the kids take it properly.

To provide a prescription with potentially dangerous side effects without the parent's consent to a middle schooler would be downright negligent.

Doctors are already able and allowed to prescribe birth control pills to minors. This is nothing new. They're also able to provide treatment for STDs, prenatal care and, in some places, abortions without parental consent.

It's a sad fact that minors often need such access, but they do.


I'd like to see some numbers on this. Can you please provide evidence to support your claims?

Please keep in mind that anecdotes or blind assumptions about young people's sex lives will not help you. I went on the Pill before I was sexually active, and didn't become sexually active for several YEARS afterward. My desire to have sex did not change as a result of going on the Pill. So I'm a "counter anecdote" that nullifies any of your assumptions, and you can now move on to presenting real evidence.

I wasn't on the pill for medical reasons, but I still was on it for years before becoming sexually active. This idea that being on the pill makes you go out and start having sex you wouldn't have already had is pretty much bunk in my mind.

That just shows that you were desperate but no one was interested in you.

What complete and utter bullshit. "You weren't having sex so obviously no one would have sex with you."

If you can't or won't refrain from sex that you could be having, that's your problem, not anyone else's.

Anyway, since when does the weird pattern that you went through with birth control nulify what I said?

Bottle's pattern isn't weird. From what I can tell, it's actually quite common for a girl to either get on birth control for a health issue or because it makes things nicer or because her parents want her on it "just in case" and then still wait years before she is sexually active.

Hmmm, I wonder if this may be related to the fact that parents who don't freak out about their child going on birth control have probably already discussed sex with them and provided them with the information they need to make good decisions regarding it.


Same as, say...

Providing children with shiny new bike helmets might encourage them to ride their bike?

Why would it? If the kids aren't interested in riding the bike already, a goofy looking helmet is unlikely to change that. I rode a bike without a helmet throughout my younger years. It was dangerous, of course, but I did it. It had nothing to do with whether or not someone taught me how to do it safely or provided me with the means to do so.

A new computer game might encourage them to play on their computer? I'd say so.

So if you teach them how to play sex games, they'll likely try those games? Maybe, but hardly relevant. No one is suggesting that we teach sex games.

And until the little fuckers are 18, parents are their guardians and have the responsibility of regulating what their child does with their body. Yes, people develop at different rates, but that doesn't mean that their parents should just sigh and shake their heads and give the "there's nothing I can do" tired responce. I don't believe sex is safe physically or emotionally in children that young, and I think it ought to be STRONGLY discouraged by parents, teachers and society.

I'm not saying deny them birth control, I'm saying try and find out why so many kids are sexually active. I know I'm not the only one who finds that freakishly disturbing.

I am not so sure that parents should be trying to regulate their children's sexuality. I think that this is a personal private matter for the child. I think parents should offer advice and even money for contraception but I do not think that parents should decide their children's sex partners or any such nonsense. Children should pick their little boyfriends and girlfriends on their own. However, if the parent suspects that something is really wrong with the boyfriend or girlfriend that the child chose, I see nothing wrong with not letting the child hang out with that other kid. For example, if the parents suspect that their son is dating a kid with drug problems then I could see not letting their son date a girl with drug problems.

I am not so sure that parents should be trying to regulate their children's sexuality. I think that this is a personal private matter for the child. I think parents should offer advice and even money for contraception but I do not think that parents should decide their children's sex partners or any such nonsense. Children should pick their little boyfriends and girlfriends on their own. However, if the parent suspects that something is really wrong with the boyfriend or girlfriend that the child chose, I see nothing wrong with not letting the child hang out with that other kid. For example, if the parents suspect that their son is dating a kid with drug problems then I could see not letting their son date a girl with drug problems.

I never said don't let them date. I said DISCOURAGE sexual activity. Obviously you can't strap a chastity belt on your daughter anymore, but you shouldn't just allow it to happen at such a young age either. That said, my argument is that with attentive parents, who sit and talk with them about the issue, who actually check up on where their kid is, who they are hanging out with and what they are doing, those children are LESS likely to be sexually active at a young age. It's not all speed of development, how a child is raised and how society trains them plays a HUGE part.

Doesnt really matter because I'm 100% married. :p

The question is, which 100%?

My only problem with this is I heard about it on the morning news, and the school has said that parents don't need to know about whether their child is receiving birth control or not.

As a parent, I would want to know. As I said, the side effects are rare but can be very dangerous:

http://www.unm.edu/~shc1/pill-side-effects.html

The most serious side effect associated with the birth-control pill is a greater chance of blood clots, stroke and heart attack. These problems occur in only a small number of women who take the pill. Women who have the most risk of developing these problems are women who smoke, are over thirty-five and women with other health problems such as diabetes, high blood pressure, heart or vascular disease or blood cholesterol and triglyceride abnormalities. Other serious side effects are worsening of migraine headaches, gall bladder disease, increase in blood pressure and an extremely rare liver tumor. Some birth-control pills may cause changes in the levels of fatty substances in the blood. The long-term consequences of these changes are not known. Regular check-ups are important for early detection of these problems.

Granted, this is worst case scenario, but I'd want to know. Also, how often is the school doctor going to see the kid for regular checkups?

That just shows that you were desperate but no one was interested in you.

Yeah, um, you just keep telling yourself that all the girlies are desperate to get in your pants, but they're just not hot enough for you to bother...


Anyway, since when does the weird pattern that you went through with birth control nulify what I said?
Since you made up a random assertion about how birth control makes girls want to fuck, and I conclusively smacked you down. It's not my fault you made a stupid assertion.

Same as, say...

Providing children with shiny new bike helmets might encourage them to ride their bike? A new computer game might encourage them to play on their computer? I'd say so.
That's not what he said, nor is it what I responded to. Read more carefully please.

Birth control should be available, free of charge, to any young person who wants it. It is a wonderful idea to have contraception available at school, since that will allow kids a viable option that doesn't involve asking Mom and Pop.

My only concern is that if these young women are going to be taking something like the birth control pill then they should consult with a medical professional first.

Yeah, I agree, but wouldn't it be more practical in a high school?

Yeah, I agree, but wouldn't it be more practical in a high school?

It should also be in the elementary school system. You can never start too early since you never know when these kids start 'getting it on'.

Birth control should be available, free of charge, to any young person who wants it. It is a wonderful idea to have contraception available at school, since that will allow kids a viable option that doesn't involve asking Mom and Pop.

My only concern is that if these young women are going to be taking something like the birth control pill then they should consult with a medical professional first.

If I remember right hearing this on the radio this morning that they would receive it only after a visit with a doctor/nurse practitioner

If I remember right hearing this on the radio this morning that they would receive it only after a visit with a doctor/nurse practitioner
"a doctor" or "their doctor"? A nurse wouldn't cut it.

I know people who had sex at 10. And they werent guys, so no they werent bragging. It starts around 12-13 usually about now.

My only problem with this is I heard about it on the morning news, and the school has said that parents don't need to know about whether their child is receiving birth control or not.

As a parent, I would want to know

As a parent, you're probably better than a lot of parents. You aren't the type of parent that the laws allowing reproductive health care for minors without parental consent are needed for. And you probably don't need laws requiring it for your child to let you know.

Granted, this is worst case scenario, but I'd want to know. Also, how often is the school doctor going to see the kid for regular checkups?

On that count? I would guess once a year, like pretty much everyone else on the pill. Unless, of course, there are health issues that increase it. I had to go every 6 months for a little while and I have a friend who had to go every 3 or 4.


"a doctor" or "their doctor"? A nurse wouldn't cut it.

A nurse practitioner would. In at least most places, they are authorized to give prescriptions. And many women don't see the actual doctor when they get their yearly pap anyways. It's a nurse practitioner who carries it out.

It should also be in the elementary school system. You can never start too early since you never know when these kids start 'getting it on'.

As a middle schooler (just last year), I never knew of anybody getting it on. Maybe one guy, but I never figured out what happened.

"a doctor" or "their doctor"? A nurse wouldn't cut it.

Again with what I have heard either or whichever they prefer. And nurse practitioner, not just an RN or LPN there is a difference.

I know people who had sex at 10. And they werent guys, so no they werent bragging. It starts around 12-13 usually about now.

Yeah cause only guys brag about sex ....

Call me old fashion, but isn't it the parent's responsibility how they raise their kids? This seems to me like Big Brother coming in and taking over the Parent's responsibilities.....

Just because some of you here have had bad relationships doesn't mean the government should replace the parents.

Also, kids don't start having sex at 12 and so....:confused:
I'd say it starts at 16-18....16 being a bit early but not uncommon and 18 being late but not unheard of.....

Yeah, I agree, but wouldn't it be more practical in a high school?
The middle school in question implemented this program in direct response to the alarming number of pregnancies among their students. So in this case, no, it would not be more practical to wait until high school, unless you think it's a good idea for middle school girls to be giving birth.

Call me old fashion, but isn't it the parent's responsibility how they raise their kids? This seems to me like Big Brother coming in and taking over the Parent's responsibilities.....

How so? The kids need their parents' permission to use these services in the first place.


Just because some of you here have had bad relationships doesn't mean the government should replace the parents.

I don't think I've seen a post from you yet that didn't include a massive dose of projection. Chill out and stick to the issues.


Also, kids don't start having sex at 12 and so....:confused:

I guess the pregnant middle school girls mentioned in the original article were impregnated by magic pixies, then?


I'd say it starts at 16-18....16 being a bit early but not uncommon and 18 being late but not unheard of.....
More projection. Give it a rest.

If I remember right hearing this on the radio this morning that they would receive it only after a visit with a doctor/nurse practitioner
Then it sounds like they would be getting as much medical supervision as any other patient who gets the Pill.

I started on the Pill after a brief consult with my family doctor, and the only monitoring I received was a routine yearly physical.

Doesnt really matter because I'm 100% married. :p
Ah, so the question is, which 100%
The question is, which 100%?
GET OUT OF MY HEAD!
Call me old fashion, but isn't it the parent's responsibility how they raise their kids? This seems to me like Big Brother coming in and taking over the Parent's responsibilities.....
How so?

Just because some of you here have had bad relationships doesn't mean the government should replace the parents.
Again, how is the government replacing the parents in this case?

Also, kids don't start having sex at 12 and so....:confused:
I'd say it starts at 16-18....16 being a bit early but not uncommon and 18 being late but not unheard of.....

Source?

The middle school in question implemented this program in direct response to the alarming number of pregnancies among their students. So in this case, no, it would not be more practical to wait until high school, unless you think it's a good idea for middle school girls to be giving birth.

Ah, I see. Sorry.

So if you teach them how to play sex games, they'll likely try those games? Maybe, but hardly relevant. No one is suggesting that we teach sex games.

..... I'd support that.














Just kidding, that would make class extremely awkward.

GET OUT OF MY HEAD!

NO! IT'S COZY HERE!

Now if this were a high school, I wouldn't mind...But...

11 year old kids having sex...

Something tells me it won't be long before they start sex-ed in the third grade. But on the bright side, at least parents don't have to lie to their kids about where babies come from anymore, they'll find out on their own...