You knew it was coming...free condoms provided for elementary kids at school...

[Nakia]

I know many people hold this opinion, but I confess that I find this to be a bizarre perspective. I don't think kids having condoms makes them more likely to have sex. I think it might make them more likely to *use a condom* when they're having sex. And really, if they're going to have sex, I want them protected.

 

 

 

:iagree:

[MSNative]

I know many people hold this opinion, but I confess that I find this to be a bizarre perspective. I don't think kids having condoms makes them more likely to have sex. I think it might make them more likely to *use a condom* when they're having sex. And really, if they're going to have sex, I want them protected.

 

As for this particular situation, it sounds to me like they're simply saying they want to have condoms available so that kids who *are* choosing to be sexually active have somewhere to go to get protection. I imagine that those requests for condoms are going to come with a little conversation and education, so perhaps this is a way to save some kids from themselves rather than encourage more kids to have sex.

 

.

 

I can talk myself in circles on this topic. If you indulge me and let me ramble and maybe y'all can provide some insight.

 

I keep books all over my house and talk about reading and am not suprised that my kids read a lot. Studies show that kids who grow up in homes without books have trouble learning to read. Actions and choices have consequences. So, I do believe that an authority (school, teacher, nurse, parent) providing condoms will cause kids to view condoms and sex in a more permissive way (not the right term, but I hope you get my meaning)

 

However, PPs are absolutely right - kids who are determined to do it will do it, regardless of if the school distributes condoms or not. Some kids are gonna take Nike's advice and just do it. With or without a condom. Obviously we'd all prefer fewer STDS and unwanted pregnancies, so with one is preferred.

 

Since that is the case, what should be done about it? There, I'm stumped. I think there are some fundamental questions that have to be answered before we can even try to find a solution.

 

What is society's role in solving this problem? For that matter, what is the problem exactly that we're trying to solve? Is it teen pregnancy or STDs? I think that's what some of the posters are saying. Others seem to be saying that the problem is teens doing it at all. As a society do we want unnmarried teens doing it? (I'm assuming for the sake of argument, no one wants elementary kids doing it) I don't think we as a society do agree on the answer to that question. Until we do, we won't come up with any solution that will please the majority of people and more importantly, we won't come up with an effective solution.

 

I guess I agree with the PP who said that distribution of condoms is a band-aid that doesn't address the root of the problem and hasn't been proven to even be an effective band-aid - not that there will ever be a study that both sides agree is legitimate. (Hey, I guess I agree with another PP who said statistics lie. As an econ major, I concur. That's the fun part about statistics.)

[Guest ToGMom]

It depends on your state. Every state has different laws and regulations about this...As each state has a different age of consent. I can't see a planned parenthood seeing a 6 yr old and giving them a gyn exam and birth control pills. Planned parenthood is not the same as the health department. As far as I know planned parenthood isn't govt. funded, they are funded by donations. The health dept. is govt. funded and follows the laws of the govt.

 

SO?? Does that make it OK?? :001_huh:

[gpsings]

I think it's disgusting....but most of all because it is out of the hands of the parents. My kids wouldn't even know what a condom was, or what it was for. They know that daddies plant a seed in mommies....why do I need to tell them more than that before they're ready? If they ask, it's my job as their mother to give them this information as I know them best. I'm disturbed that it no longer involves the parents at all. It's almost a violation IMO.

[gpsings]

How would this scenario play out;

 

Tommy playing with a strange looking balloon.

 

Ben: Hey Tommy, What's that?

Tommy: a condom. I got it from the nurse. She'll give you one if you tell her you're gonna have sex!

Ben: What is sex? What do you have to do?

Tommy: You ask a girl, and then you go in the bathroom and........

Ben: REALLY? I want to try it! I'm going to the nurse!

etc, etc.

[justamouse]

I don't have a problem with this policy at all.

 

I agree.

 

And, I have a box of condoms in the older children's bathroom that I replace when I see it's low. I got that idea from a NICU nurse that did it with her kids. She saw waaayyy too many young girls pregnant.

 

And, children don't have sex because they're offered condoms (ohhh I just saw a guy smashed over the head with a 2x4 in a Tom And Jerry cartoon! I'm gonna do the same!! Not.) . They'll have the sex anyway without them.

 

And, Planned Parenthood is not a horrible moral morass of an institution. Some of the most wonderful, deep Christians I know volunteer there as nurses. They take that non judgmental thing very seriously.

[Geek]

Agreeing with Mejane! I don't think accessible condoms makes kids want to have sex younger or sooner. What makes kids want to have sex younger and sooner is all the sexualization of children in our society, lack of discipline and adequate role models, and plain ole' hormones, among many other things.

 

Yup.

[Geek]

 

And, Planned Parenthood is not a horrible moral morass of an institution. Some of the most wonderful, deep Christians I know volunteer there as nurses. They take that non judgmental thing very seriously.

Yes! I remember the first time I visited PP as a young person only to discover a long-time family friend who was a devout Christian working there! She later told me it was because of what happened to her own daughter, who got pregnant at age 15. She wanted to do her part to help girls who were "gonna do what they're gonna do" so they might avoid the fate of her daughter. (Her daughter's life didn't turn out well at. all.)

[Hunter's Moon]

After posting that I thought access to condoms would just show students that sex isn't a bad thing, I still stand by what I say.

 

But I completely understand where everyone is coming from.

 

I suppose my point was, my previous high school had condoms you could ask for. Of course, everyone knew what sex was and was either dead-set on doing it, dead-set on not doing it, or would take it as it happened. I heard so many stories about kids thinking a condom would work 100% of the time, and then they were pregnant or someone else was pregnant. If a kid goes to get a condom from the nurse, I doubt they listened to her viewpoint on safe sex, abstinence, etc.

 

The elementary school nurses supplying condoms is what bothers me. I understand that more and more younger children are having sex, but I just really don't think "the epidemic" has reached elementary level yet, so why expose them now???

 

Idk, maybe I am living in my own ideal world.

 

I completely understand others' points of views though and I agree that condoms and birth control should be provided for free, but I don't think an elementary school is the right place at all.

[Hunter's Moon]

I understand not wanting to set an age restriction, and fully support that. In fact, I think setting an age restriction is more likely to come across as normalizing sex at a certain age. Think about the difference between a 10 year old knowing that the office has condoms for anyone who needs them and a 10 year old knowing that the office has condoms for 10+ year olds. Doesn't the latter somehow suggest that if you're over 10 you must be ready for condoms, and therefore ready for sex? I know the kids in my world put a lot of emphasis on being old enough for XYZ. Any time there's an age restriction you can bet they're pointing out when they've crossed the line and are now allowed to partake.

 

That is a really good point and I never gave it much thought.

[secular_mom]

After posting that I thought access to condoms would just show students that sex isn't a bad thing, I still stand by what I say.

(not banging my head at tigers or directing my frustration at her)

 

:banghead: Sex ISN'T a BAD thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sex is a wonderful thing, if it weren't for sex we wouldn't exist!!!!!!!!! Sex is SO important, and I can't help but think that it's all this 'sex is bad, don't have sex' that has messed up the way kids view sex. If it was 'normal' and adults didn't whisper about it and make it a topic that is handled so differently from everything else then MAYBE they would have a 'normal/healthy' view of it and would not be so **** curious about it. We HIDE the information from our children, because 'it's our right'. We're ashamed of a perfectly normal function of our bodies and push that shame onto our innocent children, who most likely wouldn't feel 'ashamed' if they weren't taught to. Children learn what they see, they see adults 'sneaking' to hide the evidence of their sexual activity, and it piques their curiosity. Sex is THE big 'secret'. If EVERYone let go of their hang ups and would just TALK to their kids without making it 'the talk' then I think kids would get over the fascination with intercourse.

 

Sex is normal, and some children ARE more interested in it than others.

Good grief, SO many children go through a period of time where their hands are always migrating to their underpants. They HAVE the equipment, you can't deny them that, but you can deny them information.

 

 

 

But I completely understand where everyone is coming from.

 

I suppose my point was, my previous high school had condoms you could ask for. Of course, everyone knew what sex was and was either dead-set on doing it, dead-set on not doing it, or would take it as it happened. I heard so many stories about kids thinking a condom would work 100% of the time, and then they were pregnant or someone else was pregnant. If a kid goes to get a condom from the nurse, I doubt they listened to her viewpoint on safe sex, abstinence, etc.

 

The elementary school nurses supplying condoms is what bothers me. I understand that more and more younger children are having sex, but I just really don't think "the epidemic" has reached elementary level yet, so why expose them now???

Why wait until it's an 'epidemic'? HOW many children have to suffer from ignorance before we 'decide' it's okay to educate them? Parents FREAK about their kids being told about how their body functions and how to deal with it. THAT is why kids aren't educated. If parents would stop FREAKING out about it, and push for COMPLETE sex ed instead of saying "NO, you're not going to teach MY child ANYthing about sex!" then maybe we could move past this standstill that we are at.

 

I know some people will say this is because I have a different 'worldview', whatever. Kids have THEIR own worldview, and they are doing what they are doing whether they are educated or not. They are the ones suffering because adults can't get their act together.

 

Idk, maybe I am living in my own ideal world.

 

I completely understand others' points of views though and I agree that condoms and birth control should be provided for free, but I don't think an elementary school is the right place at all.

It really seems that everyone is getting hung up on the '6 year olds don't need condoms'. That is really NOT the point. WHY should they set an age limit? What about girls who develop earlier, and get attention from older boys because they have breasts? I remember some girls in 3rd grade who were pretty 'developed'. There is no real reason to set an arbitrary age at which it's okay to ask a school nurse for a condom.

Would you rather them ask a nurse and have an adult in their life KNOW what's going on with them, or have them sneak them from Wal-mart, steal them, or get them from a public restroom vending machine? I'd rather they have the opportunity to receive counseling.

[Nakia]

(not banging my head at tigers or directing my frustration at her)

 

:banghead: Sex ISN'T a BAD thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sex is a wonderful thing, if it weren't for sex we wouldn't exist!!!!!!!!! Sex is SO important, and I can't help but think that it's all this 'sex is bad, don't have sex' that has messed up the way kids view sex. If it was 'normal' and adults didn't whisper about it and make it a topic that is handled so differently from everything else then MAYBE they would have a 'normal/healthy' view of it and would not be so **** curious about it. We HIDE the information from our children, because 'it's our right'. We're ashamed of a perfectly normal function of our bodies and push that shame onto our innocent children, who most likely wouldn't feel 'ashamed' if they weren't taught to. Children learn what they see, they see adults 'sneaking' to hide the evidence of their sexual activity, and it piques their curiosity. Sex is THE big 'secret'. If EVERYone let go of their hang ups and would just TALK to their kids without making it 'the talk' then I think kids would get over the fascination with intercourse.

 

Sex is normal, and some children ARE more interested in it than others.

Good grief, SO many children go through a period of time where their hands are always migrating to their underpants. They HAVE the equipment, you can't deny them that, but you can deny them information.

 

 

 

 

Why wait until it's an 'epidemic'? HOW many children have to suffer from ignorance before we 'decide' it's okay to educate them? Parents FREAK about their kids being told about how their body functions and how to deal with it. THAT is why kids aren't educated. If parents would stop FREAKING out about it, and push for COMPLETE sex ed instead of saying "NO, you're not going to teach MY child ANYthing about sex!" then maybe we could move past this standstill that we are at.

 

I know some people will say this is because I have a different 'worldview', whatever. Kids have THEIR own worldview, and they are doing what they are doing whether they are educated or not. They are the ones suffering because adults can't get their act together.

 

 

 

 

Girl, you and I probably have pretty different worldviews, but I could not agree with you more. Why does "sex" have to be such a dirty word?? My mother NEVER taught me about sex. When I asked her as an adult why she never did, she said to me, quite seriously, "That's why I sent you to school." She was a good mom, she just wasn't going to talk to me about sex. And then when it actually did come time for the sex ed at school, she kept me home that day. So I learned everything I "knew" about sex on the school bus or in class. And guess what, I had sex at a pretty young age. So the logic of sex ed making kids more promiscuous doesn't sit well with me. Like I said earlier, there are many things that make kids have sex younger and younger, and I don't think sex ed and birth control availability is one of them.

 

My girls know a heck of a lot about reproduction, and my oldest knows pretty much everything. I want them to get the real info. But I also realize that not all parents feel that way, and it's good for kids to have access to birth control and education. Now, a 6 year old? Seriously seems like a non issue to me. But an 11 or 12 year old is a different story. I am a nurse. We've had 12 year old moms on the unit I work on. Maybe, just maybe, if she had had someone to talk to about sex, she wouldn't have a preschooler while she is in high school. If it helps one girl, it's worth it.

Edited June 26, 2010 by Nakia

[A.D.]

(not banging my head at tigers or directing my frustration at her)

 

:banghead: Sex ISN'T a BAD thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sex is a wonderful thing, if it weren't for sex we wouldn't exist!!!!!!!!! Sex is SO important, and I can't help but think that it's all this 'sex is bad, don't have sex' that has messed up the way kids view sex. If it was 'normal' and adults didn't whisper about it and make it a topic that is handled so differently from everything else then MAYBE they would have a 'normal/healthy' view of it and would not be so **** curious about it. We HIDE the information from our children, because 'it's our right'. We're ashamed of a perfectly normal function of our bodies and push that shame onto our innocent children, who most likely wouldn't feel 'ashamed' if they weren't taught to. Children learn what they see, they see adults 'sneaking' to hide the evidence of their sexual activity, and it piques their curiosity. Sex is THE big 'secret'. If EVERYone let go of their hang ups and would just TALK to their kids without making it 'the talk' then I think kids would get over the fascination with intercourse.

 

Sex is normal, and some children ARE more interested in it than others.

Good grief, SO many children go through a period of time where their hands are always migrating to their underpants. They HAVE the equipment, you can't deny them that, but you can deny them information.

 

 

 

 

Why wait until it's an 'epidemic'? HOW many children have to suffer from ignorance before we 'decide' it's okay to educate them? Parents FREAK about their kids being told about how their body functions and how to deal with it. THAT is why kids aren't educated. If parents would stop FREAKING out about it, and push for COMPLETE sex ed instead of saying "NO, you're not going to teach MY child ANYthing about sex!" then maybe we could move past this standstill that we are at.

 

I know some people will say this is because I have a different 'worldview', whatever. Kids have THEIR own worldview, and they are doing what they are doing whether they are educated or not. They are the ones suffering because adults can't get their act together.

 

 

It really seems that everyone is getting hung up on the '6 year olds don't need condoms'. That is really NOT the point. WHY should they set an age limit? What about girls who develop earlier, and get attention from older boys because they have breasts? I remember some girls in 3rd grade who were pretty 'developed'. There is no real reason to set an arbitrary age at which it's okay to ask a school nurse for a condom.

Would you rather them ask a nurse and have an adult in their life KNOW what's going on with them, or have them sneak them from Wal-mart, steal them, or get them from a public restroom vending machine? I'd rather they have the opportunity to receive counseling.

 

All I can say is...

[Joanne]

12 pages and no one mentioned the lack of reporting integrity? It was a poorly done video if you value *accuracy* and great if you sell sensationalism.

 

They clearly said the condoms will not be denied to children who ask for them.

 

They said nothing about additional "health" classes.

 

Not being against this option does not equal being for:

 

1) Premature sex

2) Premature sexuality

3) Abdication of parental responsibility

4) In favor of increasing child-rearing role by school staff

5) "acceleration" of childhood into adulthood

 

Some children have sex. Some children have sex at VERY early ages. Would you rather they have condoms or not? Do you think denying access will make a child (who is considering sex) not have sex?

 

I'm not a liberal or a "progressive" but I can't support getting all wonked out over this policy, especially when the reaction is fueled by substandard reporting.

[secular_mom]

All I can say is...

 

:) *places hand on screen*

[Wheres Toto]

(not banging my head at tigers or directing my frustration at her)

 

:banghead: Sex ISN'T a BAD thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sex is a wonderful thing, if it weren't for sex we wouldn't exist!!!!!!!!! Sex is SO important, and I can't help but think that it's all this 'sex is bad, don't have sex' that has messed up the way kids view sex. If it was 'normal' and adults didn't whisper about it and make it a topic that is handled so differently from everything else then MAYBE they would have a 'normal/healthy' view of it and would not be so **** curious about it. We HIDE the information from our children, because 'it's our right'. We're ashamed of a perfectly normal function of our bodies and push that shame onto our innocent children, who most likely wouldn't feel 'ashamed' if they weren't taught to. Children learn what they see, they see adults 'sneaking' to hide the evidence of their sexual activity, and it piques their curiosity. Sex is THE big 'secret'. If EVERYone let go of their hang ups and would just TALK to their kids without making it 'the talk' then I think kids would get over the fascination with intercourse.

 

Sex is normal, and some children ARE more interested in it than others.

Good grief, SO many children go through a period of time where their hands are always migrating to their underpants. They HAVE the equipment, you can't deny them that, but you can deny them information.

 

 

 

 

Why wait until it's an 'epidemic'? HOW many children have to suffer from ignorance before we 'decide' it's okay to educate them? Parents FREAK about their kids being told about how their body functions and how to deal with it. THAT is why kids aren't educated. If parents would stop FREAKING out about it, and push for COMPLETE sex ed instead of saying "NO, you're not going to teach MY child ANYthing about sex!" then maybe we could move past this standstill that we are at.

 

I know some people will say this is because I have a different 'worldview', whatever. Kids have THEIR own worldview, and they are doing what they are doing whether they are educated or not. They are the ones suffering because adults can't get their act together.

 

 

It really seems that everyone is getting hung up on the '6 year olds don't need condoms'. That is really NOT the point. WHY should they set an age limit? What about girls who develop earlier, and get attention from older boys because they have breasts? I remember some girls in 3rd grade who were pretty 'developed'. There is no real reason to set an arbitrary age at which it's okay to ask a school nurse for a condom.

Would you rather them ask a nurse and have an adult in their life KNOW what's going on with them, or have them sneak them from Wal-mart, steal them, or get them from a public restroom vending machine? I'd rather they have the opportunity to receive counseling.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[Mommyfaithe]

I wonder if that Supt. has any of her own young children and if she would be ok with this policy if she did. I am happy I homeschool.

[lionfamily1999]

Maybe the schools in your area operate on this level. If that is the case, I am truly sorry to hear it as no one wins in that situation. In our district, there is very clear communication regarding health classes and parents are given a choice to opt out should they so desire.

In this case the parents were not given the choice. This school said it would NOT respect the parents' wishes. This isn't the only time the schools took it upon themselves to say that it didn't matter how the parent felt.

Both of my older kids have taken the freshman health class with my blessing. Had I already covered the topics? You bet! They did tell the kids how to correctly use condoms. Am I bothered by this? No! I know all too well that there are plenty of dads out there that are never having this discussion with their sons because they don't give a rip about the girl on the other end. After all, their son can't get pregnant. Sorry, but I want every young man out there with working apparatus to have this knowledge. Girls too, for that matter. That health teacher's coverage of stds was more complete and more convincing (gross pictures) than mine was. At the end of the day, there was no wink and no disparaging remark about parents. The kids were told flat out, that the best option was abstinence. They were told that condoms break, bc fail, and that it is darn hard work to be a teen parent.

Yes, and did their office say to come on down and get some condoms if they needed them, REGARDLESS of how their parents felt?

I don't believe what the schools are doing encourages the behavior. While I don't agree with the way this school in question handled the issue, I can see why they chose not to make an age limit.

I'm not saying they're encouraging the children to have sex, what I'm saying is they're telling the students, "It does not matter what your parents had to say. We are the authority and WE say you can have sex and if you do, then you can get your condoms from US." This is not a matter of them quietly pulling aside kids who they know are neglected, they are telling the ENTIRE STUDENT BODY.

 

Those parents are all the ones that aren't willing to raise a huge fuss until the school backs down. We'd like to think those parents are just the ones that are so neglectful that the school system has to cover for them, teach the birds and the bees, supply them with bc and support. The thing is it's not just a few students that these clinics are set up for. It is the entire student body.

 

Add to that the continual idea that parents are unwilling or unable to teach their own children (as homeschoolers, I'm sure many of us have gotten that vibe from school personel before, not all sp, but some) and that the schools keep adding more and more things to their day that was traditionally the job of the parent (booster shots, immunizations, new untested immunizations) and the number of non-permission slips (which is growing steadily - those are the 'sign this if you DON'T want your child to participate). All of these things are done so the children of those parents will have a better chance, but they aren't just going to those children of those parents, they are going to the entire student body.

12 pages and no one mentioned the lack of reporting integrity? It was a poorly done video if you value *accuracy* and great if you sell sensationalism.

 

They clearly said the condoms will not be denied to children who ask for them.

 

They said nothing about additional "health" classes.

 

Not being against this option does not equal being for:

 

1) Premature sex

2) Premature sexuality

3) Abdication of parental responsibility

4) In favor of increasing child-rearing role by school staff

5) "acceleration" of childhood into adulthood

 

Some children have sex. Some children have sex at VERY early ages. Would you rather they have condoms or not? Do you think denying access will make a child (who is considering sex) not have sex?

 

I'm not a liberal or a "progressive" but I can't support getting all wonked out over this policy, especially when the reaction is fueled by substandard reporting.

Isn't #3 the whole reason for all this mess? Making up for irresponsible parents by hamstringing responsible parents.

[lionfamily1999]

If it helps one girl, it's worth it.

I vehemently disagree.

[Mommyfaithe]

Girl, you and I probably have pretty different worldviews, but I could not agree with you more. Why does "sex" have to be such a dirty word?? My mother NEVER taught me about sex. When I asked her as an adult why she never did, she said to me, quite seriously, "That's why I sent you to school." She was a good mom, she just wasn't going to talk to me about sex. And then when it actually did come time for the sex ed at school, she kept me home that day. So I learned everything I "knew" about sex on the school bus or in class. And guess what, I had sex at a pretty young age. So the logic of sex ed making kids more promiscuous doesn't sit well with me. Like I said earlier, there are many things that make kids have sex younger and younger, and I don't think sex ed and birth control availability is one of them.

 

My girls know a heck of a lot about reproduction, and my oldest knows pretty much everything. I want them to get the real info. But I also realize that not all parents feel that way, and it's good for kids to have access to birth control and education. Now, a 6 year old? Seriously seems like a non issue to me. But an 11 or 12 year old is a different story. I am a nurse. We've had 12 year old moms on the unit I work on. Maybe, just maybe, if she had had someone to talk to about sex, she wouldn't have a preschooler while she is in high school. If it helps one girl, it's worth it.

 

It is not sex I have an issue with...obviously...count my kids! It is the governments decision to overstep the boundaries of parenting that gets my bloomers in a twist.

 

My kids know about sex and reproduction from a young age. We are not taboo about the subject. They also know that sex makes babies...even with condoms...AND sex can cause disease...even with condoms. IOW I do not believe a 6 or 7 or 8 y/o can wrap their brains around the consequences of promiscuity and the results can either be life long, life threatening or life taking.

 

So, this supt. will give them a birds and bees talk...How long will that take?? 1 minute? 5 minutes?? A demonstartion of proper use? How about the heart issues that go with it? What about std's? What about gossip in the playground? What about being scarred well into adulthood because no grown up steps in and says"You are NOT ready for this...This is adult business." Is it ok to hand them the car keys and say...well they eanted them, so I just gave them to 'em. How about the casinos and tickets to the porn theaters? They are just curious ya know!

 

I am not shocked by the school district coming up with some new moronic ideas...BUT WHERE ARE THE PARENTS???????

 

I would never deny my child access to birth control at a reasonable age. BUT to think it is OK to just let them go ahead and think it is honky durie for an elementary aged child to go along in adult business or encourage them to "use a condom and it will all be ok" is abuse and neglect as far as I can see. Allowing a school district to jump in and take over parental rights is just stupid.

 

 

Faithe

[Mommyfaithe]

It is not realistic to say that all parents CAN watch their children EVERY minute. Are you watching your children while you sleep? Or do you take turns with your husband staying up and 'watching' them at night? No one actually watches their children EVERY minute. ;)

And to imply that a person is abdicating responsibility by admitting they actually can NOT control everything that happens in their life is a bit offensive. My husband deploys for 6 months at a time, I don't live near family, friends are busy with their own kids or work and I HAVE to use the restroom and I require privacy to do so. I NEED to take a bath or shower, and I require privacy to do so. It is unreasonable to expect a child to be under CONSTANT supervision during their entire childhood.

 

This is kind of ridiculous. When you pee, do you KNOW where your child is?? Or do they swipe the car keys and go downtown for a beer? This is not at all what imp was saying. She was sying she knows where her kids are all the time. I know where my kids are right this minute. I can hear them. My teens are under my watchful care (yet I am a super-slueth and they rarely realize it) until they are of an age when they know the consequences of their actions are THEIR consequences. I get that you need to shower and go to the bathroom.....

Imp was talking about kids who raom around the neighborhood, both parents are busy with their own lives (if both are in the picture) and the kids are expected to fend for themselves.

 

I was that kid. The one who roamed and was never attended to. I will NEVER do that to my kids. To many bad things can and do go wrong. I am not a lazy parent.

 

I don't think you are either.

 

I think it is a collosal cop-out when parents use the "You can't be with them every moment" line. It really means "I don't give a sh*t what happens to them because I am too selfish to focus on them and I might have to confront some issues I have no intention of dealing with."

Faithe

[A.D.]

It is not sex I have an issue with...obviously...count my kids! It is the governments decision to overstep the boundaries of parenting that gets my bloomers in a twist.

 

My kids know about sex and reproduction from a young age. We are not taboo about the subject. They also know that sex makes babies...even with condoms...AND sex can cause disease...even with condoms. IOW I do not believe a 6 or 7 or 8 y/o can wrap their brains around the consequences of promiscuity and the results can either be life long, life threatening or life taking.

 

So, this supt. will give them a birds and bees talk...How long will that take?? 1 minute? 5 minutes?? A demonstartion of proper use? How about the heart issues that go with it? What about std's? What about gossip in the playground? What about being scarred well into adulthood because no grown up steps in and says"You are NOT ready for this...This is adult business." Is it ok to hand them the car keys and say...well they eanted them, so I just gave them to 'em. How about the casinos and tickets to the porn theaters? They are just curious ya know!

 

I am not shocked by the school district coming up with some new moronic ideas...BUT WHERE ARE THE PARENTS???????

 

I would never deny my child access to birth control at a reasonable age. BUT to think it is OK to just let them go ahead and think it is honky durie for an elementary aged child to go along in adult business or encourage them to "use a condom and it will all be ok" is abuse and neglect as far as I can see. Allowing a school district to jump in and take over parental rights is just stupid.

 

 

Faithe

 

Exactly what parental boundary is being overstepped? If a child is to the point where they are asking for condoms, the parents in that scenario missed their opportunity long ago.

These children can legally purchase condoms already, so no "parental right*" is being taken away. The school is trying to provide a resource for those already engaging in sexual activities to get some protection.

You are also being disingenuous when saying the school is saying "use a condom and it will all be ok". There is a subgroup of early teens/preteens engaging in intercourse (and this isn't as new as some of you think), and they have been doing so LONG before schools made condoms available.

 

*To be fair, I do understand that most homeschoolers have an extreme view of what constitutes parental rights.

[Guest]

...Phrases like "liberal agendas pushed down everyone's throats" are tiresome. (I'm thinking it's time liberals should co-opt that phrase: conservative agendas pushed down everyone's throats....)

 

...

 

If you are a liberal, and conservative values (like not giving young children condoms) are "pushed down your throat" you can always introduce your liberal ideas to your children anyway... no one is stopping you. However, if you are conservative, and liberal values are "pushed down your throat", you can't undo it. The conservative parents cannot erase these ideas from their children's heads. That's the difference, and I'm surprised you couldn't see the fault in your logic.

 

ETA: spelling error

Edited June 26, 2010 by Jinnah

[Guest]

What if they wanted them for a science experiment? What if they just want to see what all the fuss is about? I agree that a child of that age

most likely is not in need of a condom or able to use them properly.

 

 

 

...

 

Then they can go ask their parents.

[mommaduck]

This is kind of ridiculous. When you pee, do you KNOW where your child is?? Or do they swipe the car keys and go downtown for a beer? This is not at all what imp was saying. She was sying she knows where her kids are all the time. I know where my kids are right this minute. I can hear them. My teens are under my watchful care (yet I am a super-slueth and they rarely realize it) until they are of an age when they know the consequences of their actions are THEIR consequences. I get that you need to shower and go to the bathroom.....

Imp was talking about kids who raom around the neighborhood, both parents are busy with their own lives (if both are in the picture) and the kids are expected to fend for themselves.

 

I was that kid. The one who roamed and was never attended to. I will NEVER do that to my kids. To many bad things can and do go wrong. I am not a lazy parent.

 

I don't think you are either.

 

I think it is a collosal cop-out when parents use the "You can't be with them every moment" line. It really means "I don't give a sh*t what happens to them because I am too selfish to focus on them and I might have to confront some issues I have no intention of dealing with."

Faithe

:iagree:

 

 

And unfortunately, there are parents that really don't give a rip. We moved into the city. Our children and the children next door are heavily watched and not permitted to go anywhere outside of these two yards (mine are permitted in an open area, but must stay within my sight). A couple other families are also this way. But most of the neighbourhood...yeah, we are full of pregnant teens, two of the children across the street (abt 11 and 12) have been seen messing around out in the open (if the neighbour and I can see it, then you know that mom and her live in boyfriend know about it). These kids have younger siblings that are exposed to who knows what. I don't approve of schools handing out condoms to young children (really, I don't approve of them handing them out at all), and really, it should alert the school to problems. What stinks is that the parents DON'T CARE! So I can see where the catch 22 is when a school is full of kids that the parents really do expect the school to raise for them.

[secular_mom]

All of these things are done so the children of those parents will have a better chance, but they aren't just going to those children of those parents, they are going to the entire student body.

 

Isn't #3 the whole reason for all this mess? Making up for irresponsible parents by hamstringing responsible parents.

 

What about the well intentioned parents who believe their child 'isn't ready yet' so they put off talking to them about the subject? Then that child is hearing things at school from other kids and the things they hear just are NOT correct. The situation that some children are in can and will affect others. This scenario is up to the child, and whether or not they have sex IS entirely their decision no matter their age. The child who WANTS to go talk to the school nurse (or whoever) has to go and ask. Condoms don't make people have sex, and IF a child is ready to jump up

and 'do it' just because their school offers condoms, I DOUBT that such a child would have waited much longer regardless.

[Excelsior! Academy]

I have not read all of the responses, but the things that stick out in my mind are

 

without the parent's consent

and

given to children of illegal age

 

 

If it is illegal for a child to have s*x at x age then why are adults allowing it.

 

:rant:

I've heard the arguement that they will anyway. Then just hand out beer, drugs, inappropiate clothing, etc. They will do that anyway, too.:glare:

 

 

If an adult gives my child something against my consent and without informing me, especially if that thing allows/encourages/insert-your-own-word something illegal than I would be FURIOUS!!!:rant:

[Mommyfaithe]

These children can legally purchase condoms already, so no "parental right*" is being taken away.

So...let them go buy them. If they don't have the money, they have no business having sex or making babies. If they need the money to buy protection and are having sex, they should be old enough (or bold enough) to ask their parents (or boyfriend!)

The school is trying to provide a resource for those already engaging in sexual activities to get some protection.

If they are already having sex, they should be counseled to "Knock it off!" I don't think they should be encouraged to go ahead, just use protection. That is ridiculous. Once they are engaged in sexual activity and come for condoms...they need counseling both by the parents and professionals...not a pat on the back and a "Go gettum Tiger." attitude.

You are also being disingenuous when saying the school is saying "use a condom and it will all be ok". Never said it...BUT as a matter of fact, I think this is exactly the message these kids get, whether you agree or not. There is a subgroup of early teens/preteens engaging in intercourse (and this isn't as new as some of you think), and they have been doing so LONG before schools made condoms available. And there always will be. This doesn't make it ok. There have always been all kinds of perversions and nasty things going on. Kids have been doing drugs at all ages...does that mean the school nurse hould be handing out joints at the kids request? Embracing socially unacceptable and dare I say ILLEGAL activities and making them the norm, do not make them ok. I want my kids to shoot for a higher standard. If the schools want to take over parental responsibilities (and don't deceive yourself that they do not,) then they should be trying to raise the standard, not crawl down into the muck with the kids they are supposedly helping. It doesn't help anyone to normalize sex in elemantary school...what next...condoms at daycare centers? How about in the new baby packet from the hospital? Sounds ridiculous?? So is condoms for pre-pubescent kids. Counseling YES, support for the whole family...YES. At what point is enough ...enough?? When did statutory rape become acceptable? (This is definitely what I consider underage sexaul intercourse even if both parties are minors. These children should be protected by their guardians; their parents or teachers, not just given a wink and a nod...then a condom.)

 

*To be fair, I do understand that most homeschoolers have an extreme view of what constitutes parental rights. I don't think my view is extreme. I think my veiw is valid. The course of morality in our Public Schools has proven to me over and over again that I am my childrens PARENT and the government is NOT doing a good job at raising the kids in their care. And I'll say it again, I am glad I am homeschooling.

 

Faithe

Edited June 26, 2010 by Mommyfaithe

[Joanne]

I have not read all of the responses, but the things that stick out in my mind are

 

without the parent's consent

and

given to children of illegal age

 

 

If it is illegal for a child to have s*x at x age then why are adults allowing it.

 

:rant:

I've heard the arguement that they will anyway. Then just hand out beer, drugs, inappropiate clothing, etc. They will do that anyway, too.:glare:

 

 

If an adult gives my child something against my consent and without informing me, especially if that thing allows/encourages/insert-your-own-word something illegal than I would be FURIOUS!!!:rant:

 

Wow. Just wow.

 

So, if children *are* having sex, you'd prefer they not have access to condoms?

[Joanne]

So...let them go buy them. If they don't have the money, they have no business having sex or making babies. If they need the money to buy protection and are having sex, they should be old enough (or bold enough) to ask their parents (or boyfriend!)

 

This won't happen. It won't stop them from having sex, won't educate them as to the reasons why to abstain/wait and won't get them protected from pregnancy and some STDs.

 

You'll simply have those children having unprotected sex.

 

This is not about whether they *should* be having sex. It's not an endorsement of early sex. It's a reaction to reality.

[Mommyfaithe]

Wow. Just wow.

 

So, if children *are* having sex, you'd prefer they not have access to condoms?

 

I think if children are having sex, they should be under their parents eyes continuously! NO, I do not think they should have access to condoms. They should have access to adults who would protect them from sexual predators (either older or the same age) and counseled by professionals. A child who is engaging in sex has deeper issues than just the need of a condom.

 

~~Faithe

[Nakia]

I vehemently disagree.

 

May I ask why? What if that 12 was your daughter? I understand that the chances of your daughter having sex at 12 is slim, just like it is slim for my own daughter. But what if you didn't homeschool, and you weren't open with your kids, and your daughter wanted to have sex? Would you want her to have access to condoms or would you want to be a grandparent?

 

I am not trying to be snarky at all. Just trying to understand.

[Excelsior! Academy]

I think if children are having sex, they should be under their parents eyes continuously! NO, I do not think they should have access to condoms. They should have access to adults who would protect them from sexual predators (either older or the same age) and counseled by professionals. A child who is engaging in sex has deeper issues than just the need of a condom.

 

~~Faithe

 

:iagree:

[Impish]

;) I thought you said you DO watch your children every minute. :D

 

From her comments above she was referencing the little ones.:001_smile:

Exactly, thank you.

This is kind of ridiculous. When you pee, do you KNOW where your child is?? Or do they swipe the car keys and go downtown for a beer? This is not at all what imp was saying. She was sying she knows where her kids are all the time. I know where my kids are right this minute. I can hear them. My teens are under my watchful care (yet I am a super-slueth and they rarely realize it) until they are of an age when they know the consequences of their actions are THEIR consequences. I get that you need to shower and go to the bathroom.....

Imp was talking about kids who raom around the neighborhood, both parents are busy with their own lives (if both are in the picture) and the kids are expected to fend for themselves.

 

I was that kid. The one who roamed and was never attended to. I will NEVER do that to my kids. To many bad things can and do go wrong. I am not a lazy parent.

 

I don't think you are either.

 

I think it is a collosal cop-out when parents use the "You can't be with them every moment" line. It really means "I don't give a sh*t what happens to them because I am too selfish to focus on them and I might have to confront some issues I have no intention of dealing with."

Faithe

:iagree:Exactly.

[Impish]

I have not read all of the responses, but the things that stick out in my mind are

 

without the parent's consent

and

given to children of illegal age

 

 

If it is illegal for a child to have s*x at x age then why are adults allowing it.

 

:rant:

I've heard the arguement that they will anyway. Then just hand out beer, drugs, inappropiate clothing, etc. They will do that anyway, too.:glare:

 

 

If an adult gives my child something against my consent and without informing me, especially if that thing allows/encourages/insert-your-own-word something illegal than I would be FURIOUS!!!:rant:

:iagree:

I think if children are having sex, they should be under their parents eyes continuously! NO, I do not think they should have access to condoms. They should have access to adults who would protect them from sexual predators (either older or the same age) and counseled by professionals. A child who is engaging in sex has deeper issues than just the need of a condom.

 

~~Faithe

:iagree:

[happyWImom]

It is so sad to see the innocence of children being further eroded. That the children think it's gross while the adults rationalize it, telling. And even more puzzling why the parents of those elementary children are not confronting the fact that the school is taking away even more of their parental rights. Being a parent (and I'm talking about our rights) has become such a contradiction in our country. We are financially responsible for the choices our children make until they are 18....but we are piece by piece losing the right to raise them in a responsible manner. School boards are elected....those parents should make their voices be heard. Schools will use this like a court case; if it stands there, others will follow.

 

:iagree:

 

I do believe that many parents don't provide their children with a lot of things that they should, and really should not have children, but who decides what the "right" things are? We who want our children to be able to pray in school-and aren't forcing those who don't want to to pray-aren't allowed. But, we don't have a choice on whether or not they receive condoms?????

[MelanieM]

I think there are a lot of things here that everyone could agree on. Namely, no one wants young children having sex, and ultimately the goal would be for these children who are considering it to choose otherwise. I have to think that the teachers and school administration feel the same way... there's simply no way that anyone out there is hoping to promote sex among elementary aged children. I'm sure we could all agree on that?

 

So if that's the case, then the issue is really about how best to support these kids so that they 1) aren't doing it to begin with and 2) are protected if they insist on doing it anyway. I think having access to condoms at school at least opens the door for those kids to be speaking about this stuff to an adult, and presents a chance for counseling and support so that those kids make a better choice for themselves. And of course, it will hopefully protect the kids who are insisting on having sex anyway.

 

I'm not quite sure why people are protesting this so much. If you are open with your kids, aware of what they're doing, encouraging dialog, and actively parenting them and helping to set their moral compass, then what risk is there to you and your children? Won't the kids that have this type of parental relationship simply talk to their parents? Do people really think that the kid that grows up in this environment is going to suddenly want to have sex because they learn that condoms are available?

 

If the concern is that parents don't want to have this conversation with their kids simply because the school is now bringing the subject up, well, I think those parents are living with their heads in the sand. This stuff is happening, and elementary aged children need to have a reasonable amount of information so that they can protect themselves and make decent choices. If you're sending your kid to school where 10 and 11 year olds are pregnant, then it's too late to worry about keeping the subject of sex and reproduction from them. You might think you can do it, but really what you're doing is allowing their peers to inform them before you get the chance to.

 

So that brings us back to the kids that need someone to watch out for them. As a society, what are we supposed to do? Ignoring it doesn't make it go away. Keeping condoms from elementary aged children who are out there having sex doesn't make it go away. Crying that the parents should be dealing with it doesn't make it go away. What exactly are people supposed to do to make things better in a reality where kids *are* having sex, whether you want them to or not?

 

Personally, I am so very happy that I'm homeschooling and don't have to deal with this within the construct of the school environment. I'm sad for these children who are growing up too fast, and who aren't getting what they truly need. But I'm also happy that someone, somewhere, cares enough to at least try and help kids who really need it. And if that means condoms for elementary kids (hopefully accompanied by counseling and accurate information) then I have to think that's better than leaving those kids to suffer the consequences they can't even imagine are waiting for them.

[lionfamily1999]

What about the well intentioned parents who believe their child 'isn't ready yet' so they put off talking to them about the subject? Then that child is hearing things at school from other kids and the things they hear just are NOT correct. The situation that some children are in can and will affect others. This scenario is up to the child, and whether or not they have sex IS entirely their decision no matter their age. The child who WANTS to go talk to the school nurse (or whoever) has to go and ask. Condoms don't make people have sex, and IF a child is ready to jump up

and 'do it' just because their school offers condoms, I DOUBT that such a child would have waited much longer regardless.

So, the schools should make sure that when children bend to peer pressure they are well prepared?

 

The school is saying, if you are going to break the law, then we'll help you do it safely. The school is saying, if your well-intentioned parents say certain things are forbidden, don't worry we'll subvert your parents and make sure you can do it anyway.

 

It isn't the matter of whether or not kids WANT to have sex. It is the fact that the school system is saying to the local government, we don't care about your laws, we've decided that kids are breaking the laws and so we have decided to HELP them do so. It is the fact that the school is saying, we don't care WHAT you've said to YOUR child, we've decided that they WANT to do this anyway and so we are going to SUPPORT that decision REGARDLESS OF LAWS AND PARENTS.

 

I will say this... Perhaps it's not ALL parents who don't jump up and demand their rights back that are those parents. It's the parents who disagree with the idea that sex is fun and recreational and don't jump up and demand their rights back. Those parents that disagree that sex is just as natural and necessary an act as eating or breathing, that do not stand up and say "This is MY child, thank you very much. My child is not alone nor neglected and I repudiate your idea that YOU can parent them better than I can. I refuse to allow you to usurp my authority. Here is the line, do not cross it, and get your grubby hands off my kid," that are those parents.

 

I find it ironic that some people clench their ovaries and demand their right to be free of my religion, while forcing their beliefs while my child is at school. Heaven forbid, don't say grace at your lunch, but here's a condom, because we know you want to.

Wow. Just wow.

 

So, if children *are* having sex, you'd prefer they not have access to condoms?

I would prefer that people don't assume that all elementary school students are having sex or need access to these things. I would prefer that state sanctioned entities don't take it upon themselves to decide that my child is ready for sex. I would prefer that they don't assume that all parents are neglectful. I would prefer that they don't assume that all children need to be rescued.

May I ask why? What if that 12 was your daughter? I understand that the chances of your daughter having sex at 12 is slim, just like it is slim for my own daughter. But what if you didn't homeschool, and you weren't open with your kids, and your daughter wanted to have sex? Would you want her to have access to condoms or would you want to be a grandparent?

 

I am not trying to be snarky at all. Just trying to understand.

I'd rather be a grandparent than allow a state institution to usurp my rights as a parent.

[mirabillis]

wow. unbelievable. keeps my faith in homeschooling!

[Nakia]

I would prefer that people don't assume that all elementary school students are having sex or need access to these things. I would prefer that state sanctioned entities don't take it upon themselves to decide that my child is ready for sex. I would prefer that they don't assume that all parents are neglectful. I would prefer that they don't assume that all children need to be rescued.

 

I would prefer all those things too, but it's just not the way it is. I would prefer that everyone I know and love has a personal relationship with Jesus too, but many of them simply don't. So you can see that you and I do agree about many things. But the fact is there are children out there having sex that need to be educated and given the facts, and their parents are absolutely not going to do it because they don't give a hoot.

 

 

 

I'd rather be a grandparent than allow a state institution to usurp my rights as a parent.

 

Okay then. To be clear, I don't want anybody usurping my parental rights either. I just can't wholeheartedly disagree with this policy because I have seen these girls giving birth. "A baby having a baby" is the old saying. It's sad and preventable.

[Ester Maria]

Preparing to possibly get flamed for this response :D, but I'll post it anyway.

 

I strongly oppose the concept of the school as we know it today - in my view, schools have shifted from being almost exclusively academic institutions to being a sort of prolonged daycare, a place in which we send children also to fulfill their sports needs, to have lengthy breaks between academics which are also a purpose for itself ("socializing"), to get psychological support and whatnot and, amongst other things, to learn a thing or two. So, in such a context - school being a sort of "second family" of the children who attend it - it's understandable that they would want to go past the theoretical education about intimacy in Biology lessons, and arrange all kinds of talks about it, offer condoms to children, arrange them visits to doctors if they request, and so on.

 

One of the main reasons why we homeschool (other than the general insufficiency of the American school system for the type of education we want for our children) is because, well, we don't want the school to be our children's "second family" which will have the power of direct ideological influence over them (as opposed to 'only' subtle ideology that each school system is naturally based on) and the power of treating them on a "living room" level too in addition to the "classroom" level, if you get what I mean. I want to send my kids to a "classroom", not to a "classroom + living room + playground" (with all three components being equally important in these "modern" schools) when I send my children to a school.

I can deal with the ideology I disagree with, to a point. I can deal with it, if it's incorporated in the classroom - then I can address it at home. When it's incorporated in the overall lifestyle of a school, when sending a child to a school is like sending them to another family to spend their day with (and when schools boast about "family atmosphere" and parents are actually buying that without knowing what it actually means!), things like this start going on - infiltrating, on a very practical rather than a theoretical level, into other spheres of a child's life.

 

While I perfectly understand that a school cares about its students and their well-being past the direct academic component they're giving them, I strongly disagree with giving the 'right' to the school to interfere in the "living room" component without a reason too. I don't know how to say this nicely so I'll just be blunt - I don't think pregnant kids, or kids who are having relations, are school's business AT ALL. Schools are there to teach proper Biology, which includes the physiology of the relevant body parts, period. What kids do at home in their free time is essentially not the school's business. Schools shouldn't be health counseling, public health offices, handing out or offering whatever they please, interfering in general.

 

So, while I absolutely will stand up for proper Biology education (not even for specific Sex Ed - regular Biology classes could more than cover the topic, by giving it a special class you're again assigning importance and making it an issue), I definitely disagree with the school organizing or promoting anything of this kind.

 

It's not the issue of whether having an access to condoms is good or bad, leads to this or that - it's the issue of school infiltrating into the sphere of their students' lives it shouldn't infiltrate in. (By default, I believe schools should interfere in non-academic spheres of a child's life when and only if there is a suspect of any type of abuse at home/school - and the cases of latter can seriously be cut to minimum if we give up the notion of the "living room" and "playground" at school and go back to the "classroom" concept of schools, and leaving family issues to family and free time to free time outside of school; it would also considerably shorten the school day.)

 

So, theoretical education - yes, as a part of regular school classes, and mandatory. Practical education, access to this or that, offering condoms - no.

 

I don't think schools should address anything other than the academic needs of the children, with regards to this and other issues. And yes, I know I'm an extremist in that aspect, and coming from a perspective probably totally foreign to most of those of you accustomed to think of schools as "all-inclusive" services where you drop your child to spend the day.

 

The school I went to didn't make me talk about my intimacy, listen about other people's intimacies, pose to be my mom to give me "life advices", or make a public issue out of what is and SHOULD be a very private one. (I can't help it, usually I'm not very conservative, but I can't begin to explain to you how deeply convinced I am that intimacy and relations ARE and absolutely SHOULD belong to the private, rather than the public sphere, despite - and in fact, in spite - of all the sickness of our media.) They did what they should have done with regards to that aspect: taught me Biology and made me pass regular exams on the relevant body parts and processes (in a few cycles on all stages of education, with appropriate complexity), just like on the other ones. And that's, in my opinion, exactly how it should be handled - no less, AND NO MORE.

Edited June 26, 2010 by Ester Maria

[Tidbits of Learning]

All of us can talk a good talk. Our children aren't these children. Mine have been in the public school system. I found out yesterday after this thread and talking with my dd9 who went through 3rd grade in the public school system that indeed without my knowledge or permission that the school counselor had a sex education talk with the entire mixed gender class in 3rd grade.

I have had the talk with my child this year when I thought she was ready. I talked about it from my perspective and from our family beliefs. My child was a little stand offish which is unusual. I was worried that she had heard things from other kids at school and wanted to make sure she had the true facts and such.

My dd8 and I also had the talk one on one this year and she was much more open and receptive to the conversation. She didn't seem perplexed by our beliefs and it was a much different atmosphere in the room as we talked.

I feel cheated. That talk is something that should be between me and my child. That talk was something that I took seriously and wanted to make special and important and to show my child that growing up and changing was a part of life and that there were reasons that we change and a bigger life picture involved. That there is more to it than just put part A in part B and make sure you use a condom.

The "school" stole that from me and totally confused my child. They did not talk about morality or whether you should wait or whether you are emotionally ready. They talked about the basics and how to prevent disease and pregnancy.

My child was 8 years old and had not asked a soul about this and did not ask for this information. I was not informed that this talk would happen and in mixed company as well. I have been cheated out of something that was my responsibility as a parent and that I took seriously.

It is about taking something from a parent. Something you can never get back. I remember the talk with my mother. Yes, it was awkward. Yes, we both were a little uncomfortable. Yet, it was my mother and she told me the facts and was more humane about it than an encyclopedia article.

I have been robbed of a moment with my child that was ours. A moment passed down from mother to daughter and father to son.

That is what I think is wrong with this picture. You are taking these moments away from parents that will talk to their children and give them a moral base and an emotional connection to sex.

It is wrong to make a blanket policy that any child that asks about sex or a condom be given a talk and a condom. If you can't see that some of these children would just be following the crowd, then you aren't going to listen to anything that I write.

Unless you are willing to put your child into this school and roll the dice that your 7yr old won't hear Jonny Cool in 3rd grade talking about getting a condom and a talk from Nurse Easy and taking little Polly Popular behind the little building that isn't used anymore, then isn't it a little bit like going to Vegas to watch everyone else gamble while your money is safely tucked away?

I have gambled and I lost a moment with my child that I will never get back. Or you willing to ante up and throw in your bets? If not, then I don't think you should push anything on other parents.

Or in other words...PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS!

Edited June 26, 2010 by OpenMinded

[MelanieM]

The school is saying, if you are going to break the law, then we'll help you do it safely. The school is saying, if your well-intentioned parents say certain things are forbidden, don't worry we'll subvert your parents and make sure you can do it anyway.

 

It isn't the matter of whether or not kids WANT to have sex. It is the fact that the school system is saying to the local government, we don't care about your laws, we've decided that kids are breaking the laws and so we have decided to HELP them do so. It is the fact that the school is saying, we don't care WHAT you've said to YOUR child, we've decided that they WANT to do this anyway and so we are going to SUPPORT that decision REGARDLESS OF LAWS AND PARENTS.

 

I'm having a hard time understanding how you're getting from A to B here. Giving a child a condom isn't helping them to have sex. It is helping to protect them if they decide to have sex, sure. But keeping condoms from them isn't keeping sex from them, and giving condoms to them isn't promoting sexual behaviour or undermining a parent's opinion that sex isn't ok for their kid.

 

I do understand how it might happen that a parent says "no sex for you!" and the kid gets a condom from the school anyway... but the school isn't causing a parenting issue in that instance.

 

I guess the bottom line is that condoms and education do not take children who are otherwise uninterested in sex and turn them into sex fiends. If we think that our parenting holds so little sway that access to condoms promotes such a departure from what we are teaching our kids, then we are obviously on very thin ice with our children in the first place.

[MelanieM]

Ester Maria... I actually agree with much of what you said, even though I'm posting to suggest that I understand how this policy could be a good thing. I think for me it's the difference between looking big picture and dreaming about what should be (which is in line with what you wrote) and facing the reality of what is. I guess it comes down to the lesser of the evils. Ideally I would love for things to improve overall and move in a better direction... and while that's happening, I want kids to have whatever safety and precautions can be afforded them.

[Jody]

So Stupid!:confused:

[secular_mom]

IF parents choose to send their children to public school, where it is understood that they will be educated, and the parent has certain subjects that they think need to be taught by THEM before they learn about that subject elsewhere (war, slavery, famine, sex) then that parent should take the responsibility and talk about the subject with their child before they send them off to school.

IMNSHO, sending your child to Public School (or any school, really) is abdicating a certain amount of responsibility for that child. *I* don't send my children to school right now, for a million reasons.

 

Really, if THAT is the issue, then teach them yourself. When you choose to let other people be in charge of the safety, well being and education of your child for x amount of hours per day, x days per week, x weeks per year you are choosing to let others decide what and how to teach them.

 

I understand that many people feel they have no 'choice' but to send their child to school. Those parents can choose to educate their children about sex if that is a subject they feel so strongly about. Sending your kids to school WILL expose them to all sorts of things that you might not have chosen to expose them to if they were at home.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Actually, where the argument comes is over responsibility.

 

As a PP said, we all do agree that young children shouldn't have sex. And we do agree that young children should be protected from life-long consequences (babies and STDs) that they don't even understand.

 

But - should their parents be ultimately responsible for keeping them safe and dealing with the consequences if they are not safe, or should the schools?

 

Don't kid yourselves. Kids with good conscientious parents still have sex and even if the parent gives them access to condoms, and some still have either unprotected sex by choice or laziness. Having a school program isn't going to change all the statistics.

 

We don't like the fact that kids end up reaping the consequences of their own decisions. Usually we can mitigate that by monitoring kids so that they don't run out into the street and other things that might have dire consequences. But honestly, if there is a negligent parent (and at times of course just a tragic accident) there can be very bad things that happen to kids. And handing over the responsibility to the state isn't going to change that reality.

 

Some parents choose to protect their kids from sexual consequences by teaching them a worldview/values that postpones sexual behavior to adulthood, some choose to protect them by teaching them the facts so that they aren't naive, some choose to protect them by giving them condoms or B.C., some by monitoring their behavior/activities/friends. Most use one or more of the above. Absolutely none of those ways of protecting your children can totally protect a child barring some kind of male as well as female chastity belt, and even then what do you do to protect them STDs that can develop in the mouth?

 

I believe that the responsibility needs to remain with the parents even though some are negligent. And some responsibility lies with the kids themselves even if they seem too young to handle it (though if they are young enough to engage in this activity they should be old enough to understand something of personal responsibility. And I believe that no matter what you do, you can't protect kids from life's consequences 100%.

[Mommyfaithe]

This won't happen. It won't stop them from having sex, won't educate them as to the reasons why to abstain/wait and won't get them protected from pregnancy and some STDs.

 

You'll simply have those children having unprotected sex.

 

This is not about whether they *should* be having sex. It's not an endorsement of early sex. It's a reaction to reality.

 

Then this is child abuse. if you knew another child was beating another child, would you step in and stop it...or would you hand them boxing gloves?? If 2 kids agree to beat the snot out of eachother, should it be ok?? Just what are you saying? If they are going to do it anyway...que cera???

 

I just don't understand this thinking...A 8 or 10 or 12 year old can decide to have sex....with another 8 or 10 or 12 year old and this is OK?????

 

Not only is it ok, but we can assist?

 

How about Russian Roulette? Do we hand out a single bullet to each kid if they ask for it? They are going to shoot eachother anyway...maybe we should provide bullet proof vest too?? How can there be no tolerance for guns and drugs...but tolerance to kids abusing one another sexually. A child is NOT capable of making the decision to have sexual relations.

 

Really, this is how I see it.

 

What a sick society we are becoming when little kids have to be not only exposed to this garbage, but the adults do not step in and help them. (and NOT with condoms, but with love and compassion, security and protection from molestations of any kind.)

 

~~Faithe

[lionfamily1999]

"Every man has his price." This is not true. But for every man there exists a bait which he cannot resist swallowing. To win over certain people to something, it is only necessary to give it a gloss of love of humanity, nobility, gentleness, self-sacrifice - and there is nothing you cannot get them to swallow. To their souls, these are the icing, the tidbit; other kinds of souls have others. Friedrich Nietzsche

German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

I would prefer all those things too, but it's just not the way it is. I would prefer that everyone I know and love has a personal relationship with Jesus too, but many of them simply don't. So you can see that you and I do agree about many things. But the fact is there are children out there having sex that need to be educated and given the facts, and their parents are absolutely not going to do it because they don't give a hoot.

 

Okay then. To be clear, I don't want anybody usurping my parental rights either. I just can't wholeheartedly disagree with this policy because I have seen these girls giving birth. "A baby having a baby" is the old saying. It's sad and preventable.

Condoms have been around and available for ages now and have yet to prevent every pregnancy. This idea that providing condoms to people for whom intercourse is illegal is going to somehow instill responsibility in them is rediculous. All it's doing is saying "Your parents are too stupid to understand. The law is stupid. We know you're doing it, so here go do it safely." All the same, if a kid in elementary school is going to have sex I cannot see how providing them condoms (heck, give em' a room and some videos to help them along too and it won't change anything) is going to make them more responsible than they are capable of being at that age.

 

Isn't that why the laws are there? Because it was decided that children under a certain age were unable to make the rational decisions that come with intercourse or sexual activity? The condoms won't make them smarter. The condoms won't make them more responsible. The condoms won't make them any more prepared for the REALITY of sex.

 

All they do is, again, give children an excuse to believe that their parents and lawmakers are fools.

 

And we wonder why teens don't respect the law or their parents?

I'm having a hard time understanding how you're getting from A to B here. Giving a child a condom isn't helping them to have sex. It is helping to protect them if they decide to have sex, sure. But keeping condoms from them isn't keeping sex from them, and giving condoms to them isn't promoting sexual behaviour or undermining a parent's opinion that sex isn't ok for their kid.

It is when the school makes it clear that the parents' wishes will not be respected.

I do understand how it might happen that a parent says "no sex for you!" and the kid gets a condom from the school anyway... but the school isn't causing a parenting issue in that instance.

YES THEY ARE. They, as authority figures, are saying (and not just concerning parents) that the rules do not apply, because THEY (the school system) knows better. They are saying, you can disobey your parents and break the law AND WE WILL HELP YOU DO IT.

I guess the bottom line is that condoms and education do not take children who are otherwise uninterested in sex and turn them into sex fiends. If we think that our parenting holds so little sway that access to condoms promotes such a departure from what we are teaching our kids, then we are obviously on very thin ice with our children in the first place.

I'm not saying they are making them sex fiends, I didn't even say it was going to make kids want to have sex. I said it undermines the rights of parents and shows a gross disrespect for the law of the land.

 

We are on thin ice when we allow other authority figures to tell our children that they know better than we do. We are on thin ice when we send our children to spend hours a day in an institution that believes itself above the law and gives itself more rights to our children than ourselves.

IF parents choose to send their children to public school, where it is understood that they will be educated, and the parent has certain subjects that they think need to be taught by THEM before they learn about that subject elsewhere (war, slavery, famine, sex) then that parent should take the responsibility and talk about the subject with their child before they send them off to school.

IMNSHO, sending your child to Public School (or any school, really) is abdicating a certain amount of responsibility for that child. *I* don't send my children to school right now, for a million reasons.

If a parent chooses (which it's not a choice, it's compulsery, ever since 1914) to send their child to school and the administration chooses to have a moment of silence, then it's the parents' responsibility to teach their children what God to pray to before the teacher does.

 

If it was a choice, then that would matter.

 

Really, if THAT is the issue, then teach them yourself. When you choose to let other people be in charge of the safety, well being and education of your child for x amount of hours per day, x days per week, x weeks per year you are choosing to let others decide what and how to teach them.

But how many parents are unaware of that choice?!?

 

So, wait a minute, we need to make rules to protect neglected children (regardless of how small their group is statistically, and regardless of how many students ARE NOT neglected) to the point where they tread over the rights of good parents and the good parents get the shaft?

 

Shaft the people who are doing their best to protect a smaller segments of the population who might be neglected?!?

 

Then we should send everyone over 18 to prison. Some of us are criminals and we need to protect the children.

I understand that many people feel they have no 'choice' but to send their child to school. Those parents can choose to educate their children about sex if that is a subject they feel so strongly about. Sending your kids to school WILL expose them to all sorts of things that you might not have chosen to expose them to if they were at home.

The school has no right to expose them to that. Parents should not have to fight to protect their children from state institutions that are compulsery.

Edited June 26, 2010 by lionfamily1999

[lionfamily1999]

What about conspiring to be an accomplice before the fact in a crime against a minor?