Condoms For Children - Page 6

panther · 19-07-2007, 09:37

at that age periods arnt regular anyway, it seems daft putting a 13 year old on the pill, especially with the health risk too!

andrewb · 19-07-2007, 09:41

At the end of the day we should be trying to sort out the problems of underage sex. 13 is really young. However on the other hand, these social problems can't be sorted overnight so we need safeguards against pregnancy and STD's, hence the free condoms to young people works well.

Therefore im for using the free condoms as a short term solution, but I don't think it should be a long term one.

While we're at it, the advice centre in Accrington is only open like 3/4 days a week and not open at all at weekends. I think this is rather daft because theres no point having free condoms ect if youngsters can't get hold of them when they might need them. Are they under some illusion that young people don't have sex at weekends?

I'm not sure if the morning after pill is available in Accrington, perhaps it is from that advice centre but again rather useless if you can't get hold of it immediately. I know for a fact some people couldn't afford the £25 it costs from a pharmacy and for the sake of £25 it is much much better to prevent pregnancy in my opinion.

davo69 · 19-07-2007, 10:27

the girl was put on the pill 3 weeks before she was 14 and was put on because she had been talking to her mum about sex and has been going with the lad for 2 years and they had started getting feelings so her mum took her to docs and the decision was made beetween the doc mum and daughter

katex · 19-07-2007, 10:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I think they get carried away and some regret it later. A friend of my daughter said she would never be so daft but she's now pushing a pram.

That took me back Willow, I got pregnant when I was 21 .. and the first thing my mum said was "Thought you said you would never do that sort of thing " Well, yes I did, didn't I, but ... ? Did the honourable thing and married the father, but who knows how my life would have turned out if I had not succumbed to that moment of passion.. Ok .. wasn't 13, but different attitudes then and not so much birth control available freely.

My grandaughter, by the way, has been on the Depo injection since she was 15 due to bad experiences with her periods, not because she was indulging in under age sex .. well, might have been, you never know do you ?

WillowTheWhisp · 19-07-2007, 10:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by davo69

the girl was put on the pill 3 weeks before she was 14 and was put on because she had been talking to her mum about sex and has been going with the lad for 2 years and they had started getting feelings so her mum took her to docs and the decision was made beetween the doc mum and daughter

I find that so very sad.

I had feelings at 13 but I'm glad I also had sense.

shakermaker · 19-07-2007, 12:23

It's all very well and good for people of older generations to say that 'well I wasn't at all like that at 13/14/15/whenever', but with all due respect, young teenagers in the current media run society are under tremendous pressures to make decisions about their lives and bodies that the majority of young teenagers in the past would not have had to face until later teenage years.

Therefore I can only see it a good thing to give more & better sexual education as young as possible, bring the kids up with this education from day one in primary school so that they are comfortable in thinking about these things and so are not alienated with massive decisions at the most difficult time; when they've got hormones flying all over the gaff.

Hiding young people away from the facts of life is simply not an option anymore, with more people becoming pregnant, younger.

Ianto.W. · 19-07-2007, 13:50

Quote:

shakermaker, It's all very well and good for people of older generations to say that 'well I wasn't at all like that at 13/14/15/whenever',

It was, the feelings were still there the chances were not, the safety net afforded to these teenagers today did not exist, the only thing we had was our parents who took a very dim view of 'that sort of thing'. If your parents decided to disown you, and many did what did you do who would take you in?, no free house no social or very limited help. No you were on your own, a great deterrant.

shakermaker · 19-07-2007, 14:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ianto.W.

It was, the feelings were still there the chances were not, the safety net afforded to these teenagers today did not exist, the only thing we had was our parents who took a very dim view of 'that sort of thing'. If your parents decided to disown you, and many did what did you do who would take you in?, no free house no social or very limited help. No you were on your own, a great deterrant.

Surely saying no to sex because of awareness of STI's etc is better than saying no purely because of fear of their parents' reactions?
Education is essential.

Ianto.W. · 19-07-2007, 14:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Surely saying no to sex because of awareness of STI's etc is better than saying no purely because of fear of their parents' reactions?
Education is essential.

I'm not saying it was the right way, it was a fact of life, you made your own bed and laid in it, no help from any 'social'. This is why divorce rates in our generation were so high, you put her in the 'family way', you married her, more often than not.

LancYorkYankee · 19-07-2007, 14:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ianto.W.

It was, the feelings were still there the chances were not, the safety net afforded to these teenagers today did not exist, the only thing we had was our parents who took a very dim view of 'that sort of thing'. If your parents decided to disown you, and many did what did you do who would take you in?, no free house no social or very limited help. No you were on your own, a great deterrant.

Well said Ian. I agree totally that the feelings were there and I, like most of my mates at 15 - 16, became obsessed by those hormones flowing through our bodies.

However, society back then, circa 1976ish, frowned on sex at those ages. And thankfully, the young ladies (and parental/Church fears) did well to keep us "under control."

If we knew that our girlfriends were on the pill at 13, we would of been hanging outside the drugstores like dogs in heat! For those unaware (and as I've told hundreds of young ladies starting in 1st grade):
Guys are Dogs, not to be trusted

(oh yeah, IMO)

Brian

katex · 19-07-2007, 15:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by LancYorkYankee

If we knew that our girlfriends were on the pill at 13, we would of been hanging outside the drugstores like dogs in heat! For those unaware (and as I've told hundreds of young ladies starting in 1st grade):
Guys are Dogs, not to be trusted

(oh yeah, IMO)

Brian

Humph .. without a condom in your pocket either LYY.

'Course HIV and STD's were not talked about much then, were they ?
That's what's good about today .. lots of teenage girls now, I suspect, will insist on their boyfriends using them.

WillowTheWhisp · 19-07-2007, 15:25

Knowing about STDs and contraception is fine and dandy but why should knowing about them also mean that it is perfectly OK for children to have sex?

Youngsters may think it's very mature to be sexually active at 13 but far more mature in my opinion to have the sense not to.

shakermaker · 19-07-2007, 15:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Knowing about STDs and contraception is fine and dandy but why should knowing about them also mean that it is perfectly OK for children to have sex?

Youngsters may think it's very mature to be sexually active at 13 but far more mature in my opinion to have the sense not to.

If sex ed. is taught from an early age within the curriculum, then when the time comes they will be able to make informed decisions - which would probably rule out the majority of 13 year olds wishing to have sex in the first place.

katex · 19-07-2007, 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Knowing about STDs and contraception is fine and dandy but why should knowing about them also mean that it is perfectly OK for children to have sex?

No, of course not Willow, don't think anyone has said this yet on this thread .. but social/moral implications plus the knowledge of birth control is a good combination, even from an early age.

Ianto.W. · 19-07-2007, 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Surely saying no to sex because of awareness of STI's etc is better than saying no purely because of fear of their parents' reactions?
Education is essential.

In my time in the armed forces STDs were only contacted by, the 'commanding officer and the padre' they were allowed to catch it off a toilet seat or a towel, this was the sum total of the sex education in the armed forces.
Today sex education is the norm, but is it having any effect on the youth of today?, who quite rightly have their own views on the subject, and rightly so. There is no 'quick' fix to this problem, whilst society gives all and sundry various benefits,: large grants, access to the social services, top of the list for housing, the incentives to go astray are to large a temptation, and who can blame them!