Pre-teen Pregnancy

Discussion in '2006 Archive' started by mnw, May 12, 2006.

  1. mnw

    mnw
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    0
    All I can think is God help us. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/4764417.stm

    It is madness! Europe has gone down the road of Sex education and has seen an massive increase in teenage pregancies and STDs. The US has opted for encouraging abstinance. As a result STD's and teen pregnancies have gone down.

    The UK has consistantly belittled and criticised the US for this.

    The UK needs to lose its liberal agenda and admit that rules and standards are necessary and good.
     
  2. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    We didn't have sex education when I was a kid. I don't know of anyone who had difficulty figuring it out, though.

    What we didn't know about were STDs, how to prevent pregnancy, etc.

    I'd like to see the pregnancy rates for areas where this information is given to students, as opposed to areas where it is not.
     
  3. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Likes Received:
    0
    One of the chief complaints against sex ed isn't the information given but the Moral Vacuum it is given in...

    That is why such teaching should be done in the home and the church...

    Those are the places where God's Morality are most easily taught...

    Unfortunately, it's also the place that seems to have the least interest in touching such a "Dirty Subject"...

    Yes, God help us All!

    SMM
     
  4. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sex education should be left to parents, churches, and other private organizations. The government should stay out of this area totally.
     
  5. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    I disagree; as a public health issue, the government does have a valid interest.

    Unfortunately, very little real education on disease and pregnancy prevention is done in the schools nowadays beyond "Just say no". A lot of misinformation is foisted off on kids by some of these programs.

    Even if you're harsh enough to think, whoever has extra-martital sex deserves whatever they get, you should keep in mind that their spouses and children, "innocent parties" if you think that way, can get the diseases passed on to them.
     
  6. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unfortunately, very little real education on disease and pregnancy prevention is done in the schools nowadays beyond "Just say no". A lot of misinformation is foisted off on kids by some of these programs.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Evidence? What programs are mis-informing?
     
  7. mnw

    mnw
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sex Education by the government is massive and graphic in the UK. Some schools start teaching it to 10-11 year olds.

    It does not work.
     
  8. emeraldctyangel

    emeraldctyangel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    0
    After seeing the figures on this subject mnw, I agree. Abstinance is the only way.

    Id like to know which programs are giving out misinformation too.
     
  9. Daughter

    Daughter
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hear what you're saying but not all parents give good sex education, or in my own case ANY sex education at all!

    The trouble is the lack of teaching of clear moral guidelines and the enotional cost as well as STDs.
     
  10. mnw

    mnw
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ultimately it is the absence of clear moral absolutes. They can't say promiscuous sex is wrong, because there is no standard to go by.

    They talk about STD's and the emotional cost sometimes, but the kids walk away thinking adults just want to ruin their fun.

    Put God back in the lives of our children and the benefits will be too numerous to recount. And not least in the away of sexual purity.
     
  11. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your absolutely right. Right and wrong have left the building and been replaced by Pragmatism and Personal Choice. We can't tell kids its wrong to engage in sex outside of marriage because that is a moral judgment. We can only tell them that it is inconvenient to take care of children, have a condom and here's the number for the abortion clinic.
     
  12. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Specifically, out of 13 programs, the 11 were found to be misinformational, though not all to the same degree: 'Choosing the Best Life', 'Choosing the Best Path', 'A.C. Green's Game Plan', 'WAIT Training', 'Choosing the Best Way', 'Sexual Health Today', 'Me, My World, My Future', 'Friends First/STARS', 'Why kNOw', 'Navigator' and FACTS. The other two good ones are: 'Managing Pressures Before Marriage' and 'Sex Can Wait'.
    Key findings from Henry Waxman's special investigations report (linke - pdf) include </font>
    • Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain False Information about the Effectiveness of Contraceptives.</font>
    • Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain False Information about the Risks of Abortion.</font>
    • Abstinence-Only Curricula Blur Religion and Science.</font>
    • Abstinence-Only Curricula Treat Stereotypes about Girls and Boys as Scientific Fact.</font>
    • Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain Scientific Errors.&lt;/font&gt;</font>
      • </font>
      • Human Genetics. One curriculum states: "Twenty-four chromosomes from the mother and twenty-four chromosomes from the father join to create this new individual". In fact, human cells have 23 chromosomes from each parent, for a total of 46 in each body cell. The same curriculum also teaches: "Girls produce only female ovum, boys, however, have both male and female sperm". This too is inaccurate.</font>
      • Infectious Disease. One curriculum defines "sexually transmitted infections" as "bacterial infections that are acute and usually can be cured" and defines "sexually transmitted diseases" as "infections that are viral in nature, chronic, and usually can not be cured, but rather controlled through treatment". In fact, these terms are used interchangeably in medicine, and the program’s definitions are not widely accepted.</font>
      • Puberty. One curriculum tells instructors: "Reassure students that small lumps in breast tissue is common in both boys and girls during puberty. This condition is called gynecomastia and is a normal sign of hormonal changes." This definition is incorrect. In adolescent medicine, gynecomastia refers to a general increase in breast tissue in boys.</font>
      • HIV. Another curriculum erroneously includes "tears" and "sweat" in a column titled "At risk" for HIV transmission. In fact, according to the CDC, "[c]ontact with saliva, tears, or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV."</font>
      • Mental Health Several of the curricula that mention mental health concerns depict them as simple problems that can be fixed by abstaining from sexual activity.</font>
      • CondomsAccording to the World Health Organization, the difference between typical and perfect use "is due primarily to inconsistent and incorrect use, not to condom failure. Condom failure " the device breaking or slipping off during intercourse " is uncommon."...The curricula fail to note that rates of important sexually transmitted diseases, such as syphilis and gonorrhea, have been dropping over the past decade.42 Contrary to the assertions in the curricula, the most recent data show that consistent condom use is associated with:</font>
        • </font>
        • Reduced acquisition of syphilis by women and by men;</font>
        • Reduced acquisition of gonorrhea by women;</font>
        • Reduced acquisition of urethral infection by men; and</font>
        • Faster regression of HPV-related lesions on the cervix and penis, and faster clearance of genital HPV infection in women.</font>
        ...Other curricula advise that condoms have not been proven effective in blocking the transmission of HPV and that "no evidence" demonstrates condoms’ effectiveness against HPV transmission. According to the CDC, however, evidence indicates that condoms do reduce the risk of cervical cancer itself, a fact which both curricula omit. These curricula also say nothing about the importance of Pap smears.
      &lt;font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"&gt;
    Here's a bit of one, fairly comprehensive article:
    The Journal of Adolescent Health Position Paper (linkie) for the Society for Adolescent Medicine is coherent and thorough discussion of the problems with Abstinent Only Education.

    The Guttmacher Institute (linkie) is a reliable source of information on sexual health issues, but not on moral absolutes.
     
  13. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    In what way does it not work? Are the kids coming out as ignorant about sexual health as they were before they were taught?

    That's right, moral absolutes are the province of parents and churches, not schools, partly because all parents and churches don't agree on moral absolutes. Howver, in the US, too much of AOE is based moral standards rather than health standards.

    Do you believe that the same kids who won't listen to adults about health issues because of 'fun' will listen about moral issues?

    Again, that is for parents and religious leaders, not schools, to accomplish.

    There is a lot to be said for Pragmatism when it comes to health.

    Ultimately, Personal Choice will always come into play when people decide what to do or not do...isn't that why we have free will?

    Who is "we"?
    That is flat-out wrong, as in factually incorrect. The mandate for the federally fund program is very much morally based:
    The issue relative to abstinence education is not simply that programs are encouraging young people to postpone sexual involvement. The issue is two-fold: (1) the restrictive, problematic federal welfare reform definition of abstinence education and (2) the funding of abstinence education curricula which are ineffective and provide inaccurate information. This combination translates into abstinence education programming which often deliberately provides inaccurate information in a misguided attempt to scare young people into choosing abstinence.
    Federally funded abstinence education programming must meet the federal definition of abstinence education (see Table 1). Among other requirements, the a-h definition mandates that funded programs teach abstinence only, until marriage--setting marriage as "the expected standard of human sexual activity" (Block Grant, 1997, p. 10).
    &lt;snip&gt;
    Link to Source: Michael Young, Ph.D., FAAHB: American Journal of Health Studies: Summer 2004: University of Alabama, Department of Health Sciences</font>[/QUOTE]I'm pretty sure that public school teachers are not allowed to give the number for abortion clinics even if the student asks for it. As it is, many of these programs give false information about abortion, particularly risks in relation to carrying to full term.
     
  14. mnw

    mnw
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unfortuantely they do not simply say, "If you have unprotected sex you can get diseases, this is what they are and what they do to you." They also cover how to have sex and even alternatives for, um, shall I say conventional sex. (Sorry mods if this is over the line...I'm trying to word it carefully)

    For thousands of years they had no "classes" on sex. Yet, somehow after thousands of years we are still here. In the UK the more Sex Ed they have had the more students are going out and having immoral sex.

    Sex Ed classes do not disuade the majority, they just encourage already inquisitive minds.

    I disagree. Schools should teach morals. Another question may be the viability of state run schools, but that's another thread.

    But whether state run or private morals must be taught! And in fact, in every other sense they do teach morals. You cannot have an absence of moral code in any class. In every other class they do teach morals, but when it comes to sex ed all of a sudden schools are not for morals, that is for home and church.

    Perhaps not in isolated cases. But if morals are taught as the over all framework of a school within the community then yes, I believe it would work.

    I can take the other issues as opinions, but here I must say you are completely wrong. Any group that gets your kid for at least 40 hours a week better be incorporating some moral code. You cannot teach any subject without imposing some rights and wrongs. Schools cannot use the get out clause of "We just do academics."
     
  15. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    The sex ed that a somewhat influential person in town wants to push for presentation in schools (and she believes it should start in kindergarten) isn't just disease prevention and information.
    It includes such "information" as the RIGHT to feel good and have your physical needs met along with learning to separate sexuality from love and rid yourself of guilt association that comes from outdated societal norms that say unmarried sex is wrong. Included was tips on how to have a better...experience, and tips on how to know you're ready for it, which included "can you have it without feeling guilty? are you doing it for yourself instead of for your partner?"

    Public sex ed isn't just free of moral involvement. Some of it may try, but there's no way to take morality out of life. A presentation of anything is going to be biased one way or the other, without some VERY difficult effort, and how much effort do you think the government is going to put on not offending those with moral standards? I'm thinking NOT MUCH.
     
  16. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you're saying sex ed doesn't work because the kids are learning about sex?

    Can you back that up? Do you have any studies to say that ignorant kids have less immoral sex than educated ones?

    I make a distinction between teaching morals and absolute morals.

    That really wasn't my question. I asked if the same kids who won't listen to adult lectures about health because, as you said, that would spoil their fun, will listen to adult lectures about morals.

    Um, again, that wasn't the question, which for this, was should the schools be teaching about God and religion. I know the rules are different in the US and the UK - you guys have a State Religion while we most definitely do not.
     
  17. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    1) No, there are private health interests.

    2) Just how much reasoning has to be provided to a teenager so that he/she understands that if he/she abstains that STDs and pregnancies won't have to be a concern? Or just how much reasoning has to be provided to a teenager so that he/she understands that if he/she desires to engage in immoral behavior that he/she should be certain that a condom is used? I doubt that any teenager can claim such ignorance on this subject. My parents or my church never said a word to me about this subject and I abstained until I was married at age 38.

    This isn't rocket science.
     
  18. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Containing the spread of disease is defintely a public health issue.

    Many of these AOE programs are teaching children that condoms don't work.

    You're a rare man. Slightly more than half of all teenagers don't wait until they are 20, let alone until they are married.
     

Share This Page

Loading...