Jump to content

Menu

Opinion discussion: How do you feel about public schools distributing


Ginevra
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Frances said:

Is this all they are doing or do the schools in question also have comprehensive sex education programs?

I do not have a kid in any of these three school systems, but I am entirely confident there is comprehensive sex education programs. 

ETA: Yes, they do, over multiple grades from 5th - 9th. Link to Howard County Public School System curriculum goals. 

Edited by Quill
Insert info
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

So I did a google on "does giving condoms in schools lower teen pregnancies"

 

And came across this puaper which seems to say that schools that offer condoms actually had an increase in pregnancies and STDs.  

 

The question would be, is this all that is being done (e.g. coupled with state-mandated abstinence-only programs) or is it part of a comprehensive sexual health/education strategy? The research is showing the latter is effective. The former is not.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

So I did a google on "does giving condoms in schools lower teen pregnancies"

 

And came across this paper which seems to say that schools that offer condoms actually had an increase in pregnancies and STDs.  

For anyone interested in reading:
" While the fertility effects of improving teenagers’ access to contraception are theoretically ambiguous, most empirical work has shown that access decreases teen fertility. In this paper, we consider the fertility effects of access to condoms—a method of contraception not considered in prior work. We exploit variation across counties and across time in teenagers’ exposure to condom distribution programs in schools. We find that access to condoms in schools increases teen fertility by about 10 percent. These effects are driven by communities where condoms are provided without mandated counseling. "

This paper has more studies and came to this conclusion

"Eight studies assessed the impact of school-based CAPs on sexual behavior. Overall, five studies showed no significant differences in sexual behavior outcomes as measured by exposure to sexual intercourse within the last 3 months, frequency of sexual intercourse, and prevalence of multiple partners [11, 1416, 20]. No study reported a significant increase in sexual activity among students attending schools with CAPs. However, three studies reported a significant decrease in some of their sexual behavior outcomes because of the CAPs [17, 18, 21]. The largest effect was observed in a quasi- experimental trial conducted in urban schools in Mexico [21]. This study found that students in the intervention group who were exposed to school-based CAPs and HIV prevention workshops had an 86% decreased risk of initiating sexual practices compared with students who attended schools in the control group (HR 0.14, p < 0.001) [21]. It is unclear what factors may have led to this finding in this study as key program attributes (anonymity and accessibility) were judged to be “low” [21] compared to other studies in the USA with programs that we considered to have medium to high anonymity and accessibility."

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can think of exactly 0 high school students I knew/know that would go to a school nurse and ask for condoms. It seems like one of those things like DARE-type initiatives that sounds awesome to adults trying to address some social ill and be progressive about it but isn't really in touch with how kids think about those sorts of things.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

The report I linked specifically focused on condoms in schools, which is the focus of the thread.  One thing that was suggested was the schools that provided access to condoms actually focused less on the education portion of it.

 

The links you provided earlier discussed long term BC (like implants) and not condoms.

 

LARCs were part of a comprehensive sex Ed program. They prevent pregnancy nog STD transmission. Both are necessary to prevent unintended pregnancy and the spread of STDs. I don’t think looking at either in a vacuum is especially helpful. I favor all of the above.

It’s ironic that the long-acting forms were the most effective at pregnancy (not STD) prevention because they are so much harder to get for teens. My DDs pediatric office won’t even prescribe them (or BCPs) which teens rarely take as prescribed anyway.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Quill said:

Yeah, but if you buy a box, you’re covered (lol, pun intended) for 36 interactions. But if you were embarrased about going into the health office at school and just got two or three on Friday - I mean, who’s going to grab 36? That doesn’t seem likely to me - this seems to me like the likelier scenario where now they’ve run out because of the weekend, but they don’t want to go back in the office on Monday. 

 

Buying a box isn't how many teenagers are buying them though because then they have to hide an entire box from their parents than just getting a small amount like the 3 packs or whatever small quantity can easily be hidden.  At least this is how it was with the people I knew when I was in high school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I can think of exactly 0 high school students I knew/know that would go to a school nurse and ask for condoms. It seems like one of those things like DARE-type initiatives that sounds awesome to adults trying to address some social ill and be progressive about it but isn't really in touch with how kids think about those sorts of things.

 

My 13yo bestie gave birth in 8th grade. Anecdotes are just that.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, HomeAgain said:


Calling babies "consequences" is rude, crude, and distasteful.  Free protection helps those unwanted babies from becoming reality.  So really, it's about preventing babies from being unloved objects of reality, isn't it?  And I'm sure you can find it in your heart to care about putting babies in a situation where they are likely to have an unstable family life and poverty due to a parent not going on to higher education because they need to provide for a child right now.  Because of a decision they made based on hormones when they were young.

But sure, keep shouting "no" and see if it does any better good than real action.  It's been proven that the more education a young adult has about s*x and the more they are able to get prevention aids, the less teen pregnancy there is.  Abstinence education has been a right failure.  I would assume that a parent would research that and understand the world statistics in order to give their child the best education possible about their own body. 

A consequence is not inherently bad. But, I was also referring to STDs and the emotional consequences that come with casual sex.

Sure, telling kids not to have sex doesn't always work. But how long have we been teaching kids that sex is okay, just be smart about it? I didn't get abstinence only education 20 years ago in my school. And what are our STD rates like now? I do not think they are any better. Telling kids not to have sex might not work every time, but telling them it's okay isn't exactly working either.

 

Edited by DesertBlossom
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I went to my first college dorm meeting, we were handed a little box that contained condoms, and were told to carry it with us-that even if we didn’t need it, someone else might, and we should feel as comfortable asking another girl for a condom as for a tampon. That they were always available in the dorm offices, RAs had them, and student health. It was drilled into us that not only should  we be responsible for ourselves,  but our sisters as well (and this was a theme all year in the freshman dorm-that college women needed to stick together and support each other). 

 

I’d been on campus a month before I was asked for a condom (by a girlfriend of my boyfriend’s housemate)-agroup of us were gaming in the living room, when she came out of the bedroom and asked if anyone had one. All the girls present did-none of the guys did. 

 

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hjffkj said:

 

Buying a box isn't how many teenagers are buying them though because then they have to hide an entire box from their parents than just getting a small amount like the 3 packs or whatever small quantity can easily be hidden.  At least this is how it was with the people I knew when I was in high school.

🤷🏼‍♀️ My high school bf (or myself) bought boxes of 36. We knew we definitely intended to use them and buying three at a time would have been really ridiculous. I can’t really see the size of the box, when we’re talking about something  ~4” wide, as a big obstacle. My guy friend in high school had packages of sexy photos in his car glove box. I can’t imagine his Catholic parents would have been thrilled to find that when they were looking around for a tire gauge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

A consequence is not inherently bad.  But, I was also referring to STDs and the emotional consequences that come with casual sex.

Sure, telling kids not to have sex doesn't always work. But how long have we been teaching kids that sex is okay, just be smart about it? I didn't get abstinence only education 20 years ago in my school. And what are our STD rates like now? I do not think they are any better. Telling kids not to have sex might not work every time, but telling them it's okay isn't exactly working either.

 

 Sex doesn’t equal casual either. I’ve said this before but in my entire adult life I’ve had three partners. One for 20+ years, one for 5 years and one for one night (admittedly, a mistake). Of those experiences, I only regret ‘pencil dude’. My approach to sex Ed with my kids is the same as my approach to my own body. Be picky, very picky. That’s not casual. And, yeah, my parents were firmly in the denial/abstinence camp.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

Hmm.  My gut feeling is that it might not make a huge difference.  My main experience with this sort of thing was in a somewhat different setting.  When I was in university, the student safety office also had free condoms which anyone could take.  I used to volunteer at the walkhome service so sometimes I would see people come in a grab some.  Mostly though it wasn't done very seriously - I am sure they were used, at least some of them, but it wasn't a very serious thing to go get them, people often did it when they were having a lark.  I never got the feeling that had the condoms not been available, the people would have been out having unprotected sex.  Not that t convinced people to have sex who otherwise would not have done so.

That being said, there could be a group of kids at the high school who are less able to buy their own and more likely to be pressured into, or be foolish enough, to have sex anyway.  

I really don't see it as a nanny state thing.  To me its a public health issue. I'd much prefer the kids not to have sex, and in fact I am pretty conservative about birth control, but STIs are a worry in that demographic.

 

 

I think there are two ways that condom distribution can make a difference.  One is that students might come in, get a condom, and then use it because they have it.  I agree that there's no guarantee that it works that way.  I suspect that there are students taking handful after handful of condoms that will expire unused, and other students who might have gotten them on Monday but aren't carrying them on Wednesday when the need arise. 

But there's another advantage of taking something that many people are embarrassed to talk about, and making it part of daily life.  I grew up in a time when there were things that were just not discussed in public, among them tampons and condoms.  I wasn't sexually active as a teen, but if I had been, it would have been very hard for me to ask "do you have a condom", or "can we stop at CVS and buy some condoms", because the message was so strong that these things were secret or shameful.

Having the condoms in a bowl on the desk, where you can see them walking down the hallway, takes away a lot of that stigma.  It makes them an ordinary thing.  Saying "Hey, can we stop and buy condoms" becomes more like saying "Oooh, I cut my finger, can we stop and buy some bandaids".  And that has the potential to change things for students both while they're in school, and later. 

I also agree that it is ironic that the nurse can give you a condom but not a tylenol, but I don't see the condom as the thing that needs to be changed.  

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 Sex doesn’t equal casual either. I’ve said this before but in my entire adult life I’ve had three partners. One for 20+ years, one for 5 years and one for one night (admittedly, a mistake). Of those experiences, I only regret ‘pencil dude’. My approach to sex Ed with my kids is the same as my approach to my own body. Be picky, very picky. That’s not casual.

That's great for you. But that's not necessarily the message kids are getting these days. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

A consequence is not inherently bad.  But, I was also referring to STDs and the emotional consequences that come with casual sex.

Sure, telling kids not to have sex doesn't always work. But how long have we been teaching kids that sex is okay, just be smart about it? I didn't get abstinence only education 20 years ago in my school. And what are our STD rates like now? I do not think they are any better. Telling kids not to have sex might not work every time, but telling them it's okay isn't exactly working either.

 

And babies.  Babies are consequences of sex.  They are prevented by condoms. 

However, it's been shown over and over that comprehensive education lowers teen pregnancy.  For STDS, here's a quick synopsis of a study:
" . States with no mandates for abstinence had the lowest mean rates of infection among the overall population and among adolescents. States with mandates emphasizing abstinence had the highest rates; states with mandates to cover (but not emphasize) abstinence fell in between "

Knowledge is power.  Schoolhouse Rock taught us that.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 Sex doesn’t equal casual either. I’ve said this before but in my entire adult life I’ve had three partners. One for 20+ years, one for 5 years and one for one night (admittedly, a mistake). Of those experiences, I only regret ‘pencil dude’. My approach to sex Ed with my kids is the same as my approach to my own body. Or picky, very picky. That’s not casual.

I agree with you on this point, and my history is similar (I even have my own version of pencil dude), but IMO, if it’s committed relationship sex between teenagers, then man up (or woman up, or whatever-up) and buy your own supplies. There’s just no reason to fund that through the schools. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

That's great for you. But that's not necessarily the message kids are getting these days. 

 

I think we’re all responsible for the messages that kids are getting these days. I think folks seriously underestimate the number of kids whose parents prefer abstinence/denial and do not have access to LARCs and condoms and (honest) parental experience. I know a whole lot of now upper-middle class formerly collegiate ‘ho’s’ turned parents who now have amnesia.😂

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Frances said:

How much money and energy does such a program really take? Research has shown that comprehensive sex education programs are better than abstinence only ones, but that doesn’t mean anything in some conservative parts of the country. Knowing what research has shown to be effective when it comes to such things is as much a reason something would be dismissed as implemented in this country.

 

I'm not sure it matters how much, and I suppose that would depend anyway.  If it's ineffective, why do it?  I think sometimes a program can also become more about people feeling like they are doing something effective, which can have a variety of negative results.  Not hugely negative, I imagine, but it's useless motion.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Quill said:

I agree with you on this point, and my history is similar (I even have my own version of pencil dude), but IMO, if it’s committed relationship sex between teenagers, then man up (or woman up, or whatever-up) and buy your own supplies. There’s just no reason to fund that through the schools. 

 I don’t disagree. But my parents were head in the sand types. I didn’t feel comfy asking and they never pressed the issue. I think DD/DS have a MUUUCH healthier approach, free of shame, one that’s focused on being proactive, communicative, and really, really selective about partners.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Daria said:

 

I think there are two ways that condom distribution can make a difference.  One is that students might come in, get a condom, and then use it because they have it.  I agree that there's no guarantee that it works that way.  I suspect that there are students taking handful after handful of condoms that will expire unused, and other students who might have gotten them on Monday but aren't carrying them on Wednesday when the need arise. 

But there's another advantage of taking something that many people are embarrassed to talk about, and making it part of daily life.  I grew up in a time when there were things that were just not discussed in public, among them tampons and condoms.  I wasn't sexually active as a teen, but if I had been, it would have been very hard for me to ask "do you have a condom", or "can we stop at CVS and buy some condoms", because the message was so strong that these things were secret or shameful.

Having the condoms in a bowl on the desk, where you can see them walking down the hallway, takes away a lot of that stigma.  It makes them an ordinary thing.  Saying "Hey, can we stop and buy condoms" becomes more like saying "Oooh, I cut my finger, can we stop and buy some bandaids".  And that has the potential to change things for students both while they're in school, and later. 

I also agree that it is ironic that the nurse can give you a condom but not a tylenol, but I don't see the condom as the thing that needs to be changed.  

And this bothers me. The idea that we're putting out bowls of condoms like we used to put out bowls of mints says, "Hey, this is no big deal. Everyone is doing it. We know you're gonna do it. Or your friends are gonna do it. Keep it in your wallet so you're always ready just in case you or a friend decides to have spontaneous sex with that person you just met at a party!" 

Sex. Is. A. Big. Deal. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

I didn't read the second link - it looked similar but perhaps it isn't - but this is about sex education.  It doesn't seem to say much about the condom programs.

Maybe there is no data on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Quill said:

I agree with you on this point, and my history is similar (I even have my own version of pencil dude), but IMO, if it’s committed relationship sex between teenagers, then man up (or woman up, or whatever-up) and buy your own supplies. There’s just no reason to fund that through the schools. 

But aren’t we most concerned about pregnancies when it is not a committed relationship between mature partners? Why would we not do everything possible to make it as easy as possible to prevent pregnancies in such cases? We either pay now or potentially pay a lot more later, not to mention the effects on innocent children.

Edited by Frances
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I didn't read the second link - it looked similar but perhaps it isn't - but this is about sex education.  It doesn't seem to say much about the condom programs.

Maybe there is no data on this.

 It was about the beginning and end(results) if the programs. They didn’t just offer LARCs, althugb that was a big part of the pregnancy reduction. STD transmission rates, however, require the addition of both abstinence, testing, and condoms. Any truly successful program, IMO, has to combine them all. It makes little sense to study them in a vacuum.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

 

 

My 13yo bestie gave birth in 8th grade. Anecdotes are just that.

I guess it's good you pointed that out for anyone who didn't understand?

Do people really know teens that wouldn't use condoms but for going to ask an adult at school for them? Realistically? I mean, by all means, stock the schools up with condoms, make them available, pass them out to everyone in health class...I'm not opposed in principle (mostly for the reason that I don't ever expect public schools to line up with my values about sex so I'm kinda past the point of caring what they do in that regard), but given limited resources for actually educating kids I would guess it to be not a very good use of money to have them in some nurses office that kids have to go and ask for them in school.

Edited by EmseB
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dmmetler said:

When I went to my first college dorm meeting, we were handed a little box that contained condoms, and were told to carry it with us-that even if we didn’t need it, someone else might, and we should feel as comfortable asking another girl for a condom as for a tampon. That they were always available in the dorm offices, RAs had them, and student health. It was drilled into us that not only should  we be responsible for ourselves,  but our sisters as well (and this was a theme all year in the freshman dorm-that college women needed to stick together and support each other). 

 

I’d been on campus a month before I was asked for a condom (by a girlfriend of my boyfriend’s housemate)-agroup of us were gaming in the living room, when she came out of the bedroom and asked if anyone had one. All the girls present did-none of the guys did. 

 

 

I don’t think that’s a bad policy at college. I’m more bothered by the discrepency between minors and past age of majority. There are lots of things available to my kids over 18 (and 21) that in a perfect world, I wish could just be erased from reality, but under age 18, it seems like some things should not be so available. 

It’s not that the existence of free condoms makes kids who were not going to have sex decide to. It’s tacit permission that I think is bothering me. Similar to the difference between parents who prohibit underage drinking of alcohol vs. those who permit it under their “supervision.” There was a study published in The Atlantic a couple years ago that showed that the kids with the permissive parents (they called it “Get Real” parents; i.e., “get real; kids drink, might as well supervise”) did not binge drink less in college; they binge-drank more. The kids with parents who prohibited endorsing underage drinking were less likely to binge-drink in college. (These findings pertain only to the US.) 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 I don’t disagree. But my parents were head in the sand types. I didn’t feel comfy asking and they never pressed the issue. I think DD/DS have a MUUUCH healthier approach, free of shame, one that’s focused on being proactive, communicative, and really, really selective about partners.

So were mine. And one of my sisters got pg early. (Her bf had c@ndoms, btw. He just didn’t use them and apparently she didn’t require/insist. So...voila.) 

I think my kids have a better approach, too. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

And this bothers me. The idea that we're putting out bowls of condoms like we used to put out bowls of mints says, "Hey, this is no big deal. Everyone is doing it. We know you're gonna do it. Or your friends are gonna do it. Keep it in your wallet so you're always ready just in case you or a friend decides to have spontaneous sex with that person you just met at a party!" 

Sex. Is. A. Big. Deal. 

At least when I was an RA in college, it was not presented this way. It was all about being responsible if you were going to do it. Most people I knew weren’t doing it outside of committed relationships, despite condoms being freely and easily available and other methods readily and cheaply available at the student health center.

Despite a very strong emphasis on waiting and purity among many Christians, many of their children do not wait until marriage. So if the fear of God and parental and church teachings and maybe some sort of sex education doesn’t stop them, what will? What is your comprehensive solution for all? Do you support comprehensive sex education?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SeaConquest said:

I am definitely for it, but I want to share my experience working at Planned Parenthood when I was in college (for those who have concerns about their kids having access to contraception without their consent). In order to get birth control pills at our clinic, you had to have a pap smear (I don't know that this is still true today, as the guidelines re paps have changed over the years). Anyway, we always told the girls that we would only call them if their pap was abnormal. We explained to them what an abnormal pap could mean, and we explained that we would use a code name if we had to call their house (so their parents would not know that it was Planned Parenthood calling). We would say that their friend X called, so they would know to call the clinic because they would need further treatment. I only interned at the clinic for the summer, but even though we told the girls over and over that we could never tell their parents anything about their medical treatment with us, they were so petrified that their parents would find out they were sexually active, I cannot tell you how many girls gave us fake telephone numbers. These were girls that we needed to phone because their lab results came back with abnormal cells -- cells that could have eventually turned into cervical cancer, which is a silent, deadly killer. By the time you have symptoms, you are gone. 

I was one of those girls, who was too scared to talk to my parents and went to Planned Parenthood when I became sexually active. Thankfully, I had a normal pap, but I remember feeling that my number one priority (other than not getting pregnant) was making sure that my parents didn't find out. So, I really understood the fear these girls felt and why they took the risks that they did. Just something to keep in mind. 

 

32 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I can think of exactly 0 high school students I knew/know that would go to a school nurse and ask for condoms. It seems like one of those things like DARE-type initiatives that sounds awesome to adults trying to address some social ill and be progressive about it but isn't really in touch with how kids think about those sorts of things.

I totally agree. Most kids are not not going to want any adults in their lives to know that they are even thinking about sex, let alone planning ahead about doing it. So I just really can't see the logic in having them sitting out in a nurse's office as being a real preventative measure at all. It might make some people feel good about what the school is doing about the problem, but it doesn't really result in anything definitive.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

This thread is about condoms, not LARCs or comprehensive education.  And simply dropping a basket of condoms at a nurses station or in the bathroom doesn't really count as comprehensive education.  

 Quill said she felt this was part of a comprehensive effort. As I said, in isolation, I don’t think free condoms are helpful.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is a good idea. Not having condoms doesn't keep kids from having sex, it keeps them from having safer sex. (no sex is 100 percent safe). Also, it' snot a prescription product, so even if the school doesn't have them they can buy them at the corner store without a parent's permission, so I don't see it as school as parent at all. If it were a product they normally would need a parent's permission for I'd feel differently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Frances said:

But aren’t we most concerned about pregnancies when it is not a committed relationship between mature partners? Why would we not do everything possible to make it as easy as possible to prevent pregnancies in such cases? We either pay now or potentially pay a lot more later, not to mention the effect on innocent children.

Because we’re not talking about mature partners. We’re talking about immature partners. 

My post was agreeing that not all youthful sex is casual - agreed. I had youthful sex; it wasn’t indescriminate. But also, because it wasn’t indescriminate, and was with a planned partner over years-worth of time, we bought our own supplies. 

I philosophically agree with making bc available to everyone who wants it because YES, I absolutely want to prevent undesired pregnancies and disease. BUT! To me there’s a grey area in which I am not entirely sanguine when we are talking about minor, dependant children. This is a sticking point for me and is why I wanted to discuss this. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Frances said:

At least when I was an RA in college, it was not presented this way. It was all about being responsible if you were going to do it. Most people I knew weren’t doing it outside of committed relationships, despite condoms being freely and easily available and other methods readily and cheaply available at the student health center.

Despite a very strong emphasis on waiting and purity among many Christians, many of their children do not wait until marriage. So if the fear of God and parental and church teachings and maybe some sort of sex education doesn’t stop them, what will? What is your comprehensive solution for all? Do you support comprehensive sex education?

 

I'm not Desert Blossom, but I think one of the main reasons that the emphasis on purity in some Christian circles doesn't work is because it does not go along with a frank and healthy discussion of how awesome sex is and what an amazing privilege it is, mostly because a large majority of Christians are too embarrassed to talk about that stuff and because a lot of them have negative shameful ideas about sex and do not really in their heart of hearts believe it is something designed by God to be enjoyed and celebrated (albeit within limitations). They focus on the "you'll sin and go to hell" consequences instead of on the very real and more emotionally relatable consequnces, which many of these parents have experienced and that's why they want their kids to wait so much. But instead of being honest and telling them their own story of sexual mistakes that they regret and being real with their kids, they fall back on the purity thing. And so they pass that attitude to their kids and it's just not effective. That doesn't mean that teaching abstinence isn't effective, just that the mainstream way that a lot of Christians approach teaching abstinence isn't effective. And yes I believe an emphasis on abstinence and the emotional/physical consequences of sexuality should be coupled with frank and honest info about STDs and birth control. I think too many times people think it has to be one or the other (abstinence or other) when really a combination is probably best.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Frances said:

At least when I was an RA in college, it was not presented this way. It was all about being responsible if you were going to do it. Most people I knew weren’t doing it outside of committed relationships, despite condoms being freely and easily available and other methods readily and cheaply available at the student health center.

Despite a very strong emphasis on waiting and purity among many Christians, many of their children do not wait until marriage. So if the fear of God and parental and church teachings and maybe some sort of sex education doesn’t stop them, what will? What is your comprehensive solution for all? Do you support comprehensive sex education?

 

Just because it doesn't always work, doesn't mean it's not worth teaching. I waited until sex for marriage and I still think it was one of the best decisions I made for myself. Zero regrets about that. 

I know that abstinence-only education doesn't always work, but it teaches that sex is a really big deal and not a decision to be taken lightly. Even if some kids don't wait, we're still teaching that it's a really big deal. And even if they have sex outside of marriage, pretending that it's not a big deal is not helping anyone. If we could prevent all unplanned pregnancies and all STDs, there are still emotional and psychological consequences to engaging in casual sex, especially among teenagers. The message that kids are getting today from media and other places is that casual sex (or any sexual activity) is just fine as long as you're careful. And putting out a bowl of condoms contributes to that idea. 

It appears that I am a minority here in my beliefs, which is fine. I'm not clutching my pearls. I know that sometimes kids have sex. I know that sometimes Christian kids who have been taught to wait still have sex. I plan to be very open with my kids and we'll talk about condoms and pregnancy and STDs. But I sure as hell will not be putting out a bowl of condoms for them and tell them I think it's just fine as long as they are "careful."

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am 100% for it. If they are free kids are more likely to use them. Unless you're buying condoms for your kids, I don't at all see this as parental interference. ETA: I don't think kids should have to ask the nurse for them. They should be in the nurse's bathroom and kids can just take them. 

Edited by hippiemamato3
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am ok with it. When I was in high school we had a health clinic near the school that gave out condoms. We would go get them and safety pin them on our overalls and jeans (TLC days lol) yet I still ended up a teen parent. I appreciate their attempts but kids will make choices regardless of condoms. Not too many kids will decide to not have sex just because they do not have a condom anymore than having a condom will make them have sex. What does push kids into being callous to this important decision is exposure to explicit music, books, television and social media. That has way more of an effect than condoms at the nurses office.  

Edited by nixpix5
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DesertBlossom said:

Just because it doesn't always work, doesn't mean it's not worth teaching. I waited until sex for marriage and I still think it was one of the best decisions I made for myself. Zero regrets about that. 

I know that abstinence-only education doesn't always work, but it teaches that sex is a really big deal and not a decision to be taken lightly. Even if some kids don't wait, we're still teaching that it's a really big deal. And even if they have sex outside of marriage, pretending that it's not a big deal is not helping anyone. If we could prevent all unplanned pregnancies and all STDs, there are still emotional and psychological consequences to engaging in casual sex, especially among teenagers. The message that kids are getting today from media and other places is that casual sex (or any sexual activity) is just fine as long as you're careful. And putting out a bowl of condoms contributes to that idea. 

It appears that I am a minority here in my beliefs, which is fine. I'm not clutching my pearls. I know that sometimes kids have sex. I know that sometimes Christian kids who have been taught to wait still have sex. I plan to be very open with my kids and we'll talk about condoms and pregnancy and STDs. But I sure as hell will not be putting out a bowl of condoms for them and tell them I think it's just fine as long as they are "careful."

 

I think that you are drawing a false dichotomy here. I don't think that abstinence only education is effective. I firmly believe in teaching comprehensive sex education in school, as a matter of public health, and I have chosen to do the same in our homeschool. However, while I do believe that sex is a positive and healthy thing among consenting adults, I would never teach my kids that it is "no big deal" or that it has "no emotional/psychological consequences, especially among teenagers." I do not think that "casual sex is fine as long as you are careful." Sex has very real emotional and physical effects on the body and mind, and comprehensive sex education teaches all about such things and why. 

Edited by SeaConquest
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 100% for this.  Dental dams, too.  Should come with a booklet on STIs.

I also think that public high schools should have a once/month health clinic where teen girls can get long-acting birth control for free, such as implants/IUDs.  

Anything to help prevent unwanted pregnancies.  

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything that prevents disease and unwanted pregnancies is good.

Teenagers don't suddenly have sex because the nurse's office has condoms. Conversely, a lack of condom does not prevent sex either.

I can't even begin to think why this would be a problem.

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% for it!  I don't care if it only helps 5 kids....that is 5 less kids with unplanned teen pregnancies or STDs.  

A lot of teens do not have jobs or money. Asking dad for $10 for a box of condoms isn't in a lot of family cultures. Sex is a *free passtime and is something that isn't limited by how much money a teen has in their pocket.  Add in embarrassment, and the fear of getting recognized buying condoms, it makes it much more likely that a teen would feel comfortable getting them from the school nurse, vs the grocery store.  They can also just get a couple, vs buying a box and then having to store the extras. I can also see the one kid who doesn't care about what the nurse thinks (or is showing off) getting extras for friends. 

I work in pharmacy, you would be surprised how many grown adults, walk all the way to the back of the store to pay for condoms and female hygiene products in the pharmacy, due to being embarrassed in front of the main cashiers (not a small town BTW). They will pay for them in the pharmacy (perceived trust due to medical profession) with less embarrassment....which makes me think that they are way more likely to get them from the school nurse than the grocery store. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DesertBlossom said:

Just because it doesn't always work, doesn't mean it's not worth teaching. I waited until sex for marriage and I still think it was one of the best decisions I made for myself. Zero regrets about that. 

I know that abstinence-only education doesn't always work, but it teaches that sex is a really big deal and not a decision to be taken lightly. Even if some kids don't wait, we're still teaching that it's a really big deal. And even if they have sex outside of marriage, pretending that it's not a big deal is not helping anyone. If we could prevent all unplanned pregnancies and all STDs, there are still emotional and psychological consequences to engaging in casual sex, especially among teenagers. The message that kids are getting today from media and other places is that casual sex (or any sexual activity) is just fine as long as you're careful. And putting out a bowl of condoms contributes to that idea. 

It appears that I am a minority here in my beliefs, which is fine. I'm not clutching my pearls. I know that sometimes kids have sex. I know that sometimes Christian kids who have been taught to wait still have sex. I plan to be very open with my kids and we'll talk about condoms and pregnancy and STDs. But I sure as hell will not be putting out a bowl of condoms for them and tell them I think it's just fine as long as they are "careful."

Why not then comprehensive sex education that teaches all of the advantages of waiting, but prepares them if they don’t? As I said, I actually agree with you on waiting and that it is a very big deal, just not due to religious reasons. We know from research that abstinence only is not as effective as comprehensive education. My biggest concern is innocent children potentially being born into bad situations, so I want to go with is proven to be most effective in preventing that.

Edited by Frances
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Frances said:

Why not then comprehensive sex education that teaches all of the advantages of waiting, but prepares them if they don’t? As I said, I actually agree with you on waiting and that it is a very big deal, just not due to religious reasons. We know from research that abstinence only is not as effective as comprehensive education. My biggest concern is innocent children potentially being born into bad situations, so I want to go with is proven to be most effective in preventing that.

I do not have a problem with comprehensive sex education. I do have a problem with schools passing out free condoms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Quill said:

I agree with you on this point, and my history is similar (I even have my own version of pencil dude), but IMO, if it’s committed relationship sex between teenagers, then man up (or woman up, or whatever-up) and buy your own supplies. There’s just no reason to fund that through the schools. 

Considering how a student's pregnancy disrupts her education, and how much schools likely spend trying to get teen moms back into and through high school, and the likelihood that the mom who doesn't get through will raise that little one in poverty and the schools will be dealing with him/her as a kindergartner in ~6 years, I think it makes sense for schools to throw a few hundred dollars a year per school--the cost of one laptop?--at this problem and see if it helps anybody.

2 hours ago, Quill said:

I don’t think that’s a bad policy at college. I’m more bothered by the discrepency between minors and past age of majority. There are lots of things available to my kids over 18 (and 21) that in a perfect world, I wish could just be erased from reality, but under age 18, it seems like some things should not be so available. 

It’s not that the existence of free condoms makes kids who were not going to have sex decide to. It’s tacit permission that I think is bothering me. Similar to the difference between parents who prohibit underage drinking of alcohol vs. those who permit it under their “supervision.” There was a study published in The Atlantic a couple years ago that showed that the kids with the permissive parents (they called it “Get Real” parents; i.e., “get real; kids drink, might as well supervise”) did not binge drink less in college; they binge-drank more. The kids with parents who prohibited endorsing underage drinking were less likely to binge-drink in college. (These findings pertain only to the US.) 

A whole lot of high school students are 18 or 19. Depending on your state, it is now the norm for students to be 18 at least for the whole senior year based on K cut-offs, with a fair number of  kids a year older than that because of delayed K entrance or staying back a year. And the age of consent in many states is below 18.

I opted to wait for sex (so DH, my high school boyfriend, did not have a choice w/o breaking up with me!). I'm encouraging my kid to do the same, but I think condoms should be available without a stigma and without parental cooperation. I also chose not to drink. It looks like significant numbers of youth are not so risk-averse, and nearly all will choose both to drink alcohol and to have sex by early adulthood, so I prefer that we normalize condoms, designated drivers, and other harm-reduction steps even as we counsel delaying risky behaviors.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, whitehawk said:

Considering how a student's pregnancy disrupts her education, and how much schools likely spend trying to get teen moms back into and through high school, and the likelihood that the mom who doesn't get through will raise that little one in poverty and the schools will be dealing with him/her as a kindergartner in ~6 years, I think it makes sense for schools to throw a few hundred dollars a year per school--the cost of one laptop?--at this problem and see if it helps anybody.

A whole lot of high school students are 18 or 19. Depending on your state, it is now the norm for students to be 18 at least for the whole senior year based on K cut-offs, with a fair number of  kids a year older than that because of delayed K entrance or staying back a year. And the age of consent in many states is below 18.

I opted to wait for sex (so DH, my high school boyfriend, did not have a choice w/o breaking up with me!). I'm encouraging my kid to do the same, but I think condoms should be available without a stigma and without parental cooperation. I also chose not to drink. It looks like significant numbers of youth are not so risk-averse, and nearly all will choose both to drink alcohol and to have sex by early adulthood, so I prefer that we normalize condoms, designated drivers, and other harm-reduction steps even as we counsel delaying risky behaviors.

Condoms are available without a stigma and without parental cooperation. It's called a store. Or if that's uncomfortable I happen to know plenty of gas stations that stock them in vending machines in the bathroom in all sorts of colors and flavors. 

I really don't understand this idea that teenagers are mature enough to have sex but not mature enough to be responsible for paying for their own supplies.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll also admit right here that I'm coming at this as a free-breakfast-and-lunch-eating co-valedictorian. Offering students through schools things that can improve health outcomes if their parents can't/don't seems, of course, like a very sound idea to me.

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2019 at 7:37 PM, DesertBlossom said:

Condoms are available without a stigma and without parental cooperation. It's called a store. Or if that's uncomfortable I happen to know plenty of gas stations that stock them in vending machines in the bathroom in all sorts of colors and flavors. 

I really don't understand this idea that teenagers are mature enough to have sex but not mature enough to be responsible for paying for their own supplies.

It sounds like you expect teenagers to have unsupervised access to stores/gas stations. Many don't. I didn't. And I lived in a city.

In high school, I had no money (not allowed to work, needed at home) and no way to get anywhere (was only able to date DH because he had access to a car) . Like, I went to the public library twice? in four years, whereas in adulthood I'm there every week. My grandmothers bought all my clothes (bless them, they gave my mom money some of the time so I had some input and could try shoes on). I did not buy any food. I could not have had a birth control budget, and if I did, I could not have had access to a store. (I don't think the corner store sold anything but junk food.) I chose not to have sex, but I think expecting that of 100% of teens is unreasonable.

Maybe I should say "unrealistic," in light of actual human behavior now and in history. I know all my grandparents were having unprotected sex in the '50s by age 18, because I can subtract.  🙂

Edited by 73349
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

Condoms are available without a stigma and without parental cooperation. It's called a store. Or if that's uncomfortable I happen to know plenty of gas stations that stock them in vending machines in the bathroom in all sorts of colors and flavors. 

I really don't understand this idea that teenagers are mature enough to have sex but not mature enough to be responsible for paying for their own supplies.

My perspective is that many teens are not mature enough to have sex, but they are going to do it anyway. Heck, many adults are not mature enough to be having sex. So let’s make it as easy as possible for them to practice safe sex. Like you, I’d prefer they wait, but many don’t.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...