Teen Condoms

[Lord Drake]

In any situation all serious points she be heard, the evidence weighed, the numbers ran, and decision reached based off of analysis of information, not blind adherence to imbued dogmatic principles.

Exactly.

I think we are walking on a fine line here.

Everything that may help "reduce the damage" on something is useful IF is paired with some kind of education about how to avoid the damage entirely.

Reducing the damage is NOT solving the problem. There are many people in the world that accidentally die for misuse of firearms... it is not like states are giving free bulletproofs vests to citizens, though.

If we keep THIS in mind, then we may consider the use of mini-condoms or whatever. If we do not, I personally am forceed to agree with the "dogmatic principles".

[MercyfulFate]

Exactly.

I think we are walking on a fine line here.

Everything that may help "reduce the damage" on something is useful IF is paired with some kind of education about how to avoid the damage entirely.

Reducing the damage is NOT solving the problem. There are many people in the world that accidentally die for misuse of firearms... it is not like states are giving free bulletproofs vests to citizens, though.

If we keep THIS in mind, then we may consider the use of mini-condoms or whatever. If we do not, I personally am forceed to agree with the "dogmatic principles".

Abstinence education is pretty much pointless. Sure it should be an option, but teaching kids it's the only way is doomed to fail.

They will have sex. You need to teach them how to do it safely.

[Torch]

All numbers aside ... facts are YOUNG teens ARE having sex, in EVERY country. Period.

When I was a teenager (too long ago to mention) both of my under 15 year old cousins got pregnant, The guys who got them pregnant? Their age as well.  And seriously, the numbers of sexually active teens have sure as hell not gone down.

Actually, while they may not have necessarily gone down, they aren't going up either. I believe the numbers have remained fairly constant throughout the previous century. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a very small percentage of teens under the age of 15 are having sex, but the number rises to a majority percentage by the age of 19 (which is of course, above the age of consent in every state). The latest data shows that teens are actually waiting later to have their first sexual experience.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-ATSRH.html

Why would it ever be a bad thing to protect someone from unwanted pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and what all. You can shake a finger all you want, make all the 'rules' you want and tsk tsk tsk .... it's not going to stop kids from fucking.

Or drinking, or using drugs, or watching South Park or anything else 'you' think they shouldn't be doing it. In fact, the more you tell them 'no' the more intriguing the forbidden item becomes.

End rant.

While that might be true for a small percentage of teens, it isn't true for ALL teens, otherwise EVERY teen would be drinking, using illegal drugs, and engaging in sexual behavior. And statistics show that the majority of teens DO NOT engage in this type of behavior.

Please don't paint all teenagers with a broad brush. There do exist teenagers who are self-aware enough to make smart choices, and weigh the consequences of their behavior. My fifteen year old daughter is one of them.

Yes, there will always be a certain percentage of teens that engage in risky and illegal behavior. But they are not the norm or nor are they the majority.

[Jude]

Abstinence education is pretty much pointless. Sure it should be an option, but teaching kids it's the only way is doomed to fail.

They will have sex. You need to teach them how to do it safely.

A federally-funded University of Pennsylvania study published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine found that only one third of sixth- and seventh-graders who completed abstinence-focused programs had sex within the next two years, compared to nearly half of the students who attended other classes, including ones that taught combined abstinence and contraception.[3]  The study has been called "game-changing" by supporters of abstinence-only sex education. Critics pointed out that the abstinence program used in the study was not representative of most abstinence programs; it did not take a moralistic tone, encouraged children to delay sex until ready instead of until married, did not portray extramarital sex as inappropriate, and did not disparage contraceptives.[4]

According to SIECUS, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, an organisation that promotes sex education in the United States[5], a "...study, conducted by Mathematica Policy Research Inc. on behalf of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, found that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs are ineffective."[6]

A 2010 report by the Guttmacher Institute, a division of Planned Parenthood,[7] pointed out that pregnancy rates for teens 15-19 reversed their decline in 2006, near the peak of the Abstinence Only campaign in the United States.[8] Sarah Kliff of Newsweek pointed out that there was no corresponding "indication of an uptick" in teen pregnancy rates when abstinence-only sex education funding was increased during the Clinton years, but in fact a small decline.[9] James Wagoner, president of the nonprofit group Advocates for Youth, blames the poor quality of Bush era abstinence-only programs as compared to abstinence-only programs under Clinton's administration for the difference in outcomes.[10]

Doesn't seem as settled as you seem convinced that it is.  What exactly are you basing that opinion on, anyway?  I don't think abstinence only is the way to go, but you have to form your opinions, especially when they're stark and strong, on fact not personal inclinations.

[MercyfulFate]

Doesn't seem as settled as you seem convinced that it is.  What exactly are you basing that opinion on, anyway?  I don't think abstinence only is the way to go, but you have to form your opinions, especially when they're stark and strong, on fact not personal inclinations.

You need to read what you quoted more carefully, it's well pointed out that that one class wasn't like the majority of them, and it's not indicative of how abstinence only is taught in most places.

http://www.openeducation.net/2009/01/05/abstinence-only-sex-education-statistics-final-nail-in-the-coffin/

Effectiveness of Program
Previously, when discussing abstinence-only education, most people would reference a recent summary by the Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane folks studied 13 abstinence-only education programs – they could not find one that showed an “enduring effect” on teen’s sexual behavior.

In addition to the Cochrane study, another federally funded study of four abstinence-only programs by the Mathematica Policy Research Inc., published in April of 2007, revealed similar results. The research group found that “participants had just as many sexual partners as nonparticipants and had sex at the same median age as nonparticipants.” In other words, abstinence education programs did nothing favorable – the result was the same as if there were no program being offered at all.

Now a third study, this by Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, revealed some of the most troubling data of all. A national longitudinal study of adolescents, specifically 934 high school students, examined one of the factors used as a measurement of success for abstinence-only education programs, the virginity pledge.

Final Nail in the Coffin
In the most recent study, researchers compared teens who had taken the virginity pledge to those who had not taken a pledge. The researchers found results similar to the aforementioned studies.

First, the rate of the teens taking part in sex was the same. Those taking the virginity pledge were just as likely to have intercourse. The only positive, statistically small, was that those taking the pledge had 0.1 fewer sex partners over the five year study than did those who did not take such a pledge.

The worst part? Here you go:
However, two other findings were most damning. First, those taking the virginity pledge were less likely to protect themselves. Pledge takers were found to be less frequent users of condoms and other forms of birth control.

Therefore, those youngsters who took the virginity pledge were not only just as likely to have intercourse, they ultimately were more likely to take part in sex in an unsafe manner. This has led experts to conclude that the lessons students take from their abstinence-only education programs is a negative and/or faulty view of contraception.

Second, and most importantly, virginity pledges are one of the measurement tools for determining if the abstinence education program is effective. For these federal funded programs, the government has counted pledges as data that the program is effective.
Rosenbaum summarizes the data succinctly, “Abstinence-only education is required to give inaccurate information. Teens are savvy consumers of information and know what they are getting.”

Teach kids abstinence only, don't teach them about how to be safe when they actually choose to have sex, and you've made it a lot worse for them. Do you really believe kids will never have sex, or wait longer if you tell them not to? They are GOING to do it, much like the D.A.R.E. program was an epic failure on teaching kids not to use drugs, thus is abstinence only education.

So it's not just personal opinion, thanks.

[DarklingAlice]

Actually, while they may not have necessarily gone down, they aren't going up either. I believe the numbers have remained fairly constant throughout the previous century. According to the Guttmacher Institute, very few teens under the age of 15 are having sex, but the number rises to a majority by the age of 19 (which is of course, above the age of consent in every state). The latest data shows that teens are actually waiting later to have their first sexual experience.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-ATSRH.html

@Torch: Be careful in the way you put things. While it is true a small percentage of teens engage in sex under fifteen, a very large number do. The link you posted estimates that over eight-million children will have had sex before the age of fifteen, in America alone. This is not "very few".

@Jude: Yes, we could certainly listen to the opinion of James Wagoner, or we could listen to the WHO and CDC, whose research has shown no conclusive benefit to abstinence-only education, as opposed to clear benefit to abstinence+ education. Or the peer reviewed journal articles like Bruckner & Bearman, 2006. Which showed no appreciable benefit in terms of STD prevention from pledges of abstinence. Or the numerous state health departments that have performed studies and found no benefit to abstinence-only education (like the 'Abstinence Education Evaluation Phase 5 Technical Report' the Texas State Health Department performed in 2004-2005). Or the polls of the public and the scientific community that show there is significant agreement that there is more benefit to abstinence+ education, regardless of political affiliation (c.f. Bleakly, et al. 2006). Further, the practice of abstinence-only sex education has even come under fire from the medical community as being unethical (c.f. Santelli & Ott, 2006).

So yeah, we could spend five minutes Wikipediaing something and try to manufacture a controversy, or we could actually research a topic from primary sources and see that there isn't one.

[Torch]

@Torch: Be careful in the way you put things. While it is true a small percentage of teens engage in sex under fifteen, a very large number do. The link you posted estimates that over eight-million children will have had sex before the age of fifteen, in America alone. This is not "very few".

I was speaking of percentages, not numbers, and I will amend my post to include the clarifying word.

And "very few" is a subjective term. IMO, 13% is very few when you consider the percentage curve and the fact that most of those 13% are closer to the age of fifteen than not. In considering the population of the United States as a whole, 8 million (assuming that is the correct number) is "very few", IMO.

[LIAR]

People are going to do what they want to do whenever they think they're ready to do it. Best thing we can do is inform, inform, inform. What they do with that knowledge? Their choice.

[Torch]

People are going to do what they want to do whenever they think they're ready to do it. Best thing we can do is inform, inform, inform. What they do with that knowledge? Their choice.

Except we aren't talking about "people", we are talking about minor children, and in most (if not all) states it is illegal for these minor children to be engaging in sexual behavior with anyone.

And I have heard absolutely nothing from anyone regarding parental responsibility for these minor children. A 12 year old child CANNOT make the choice or give consent to sexual behavior, even with another child.

Disclaimer: I'm not speaking about "playing doctor" or games of "You show me yours, and I'll show you mine." I'm talking about full-on intercourse or oral sex.

[MercyfulFate]

Except we aren't talking about "people", we are talking about minor children, and in most (if not all) states it is illegal for these minor children to be engaging in sexual behavior with anyone.

And I have heard absolutely nothing from anyone regarding parental responsibility for these minor children. A 12 year old child CANNOT make the choice or give consent to sexual behavior, even with another child.

Disclaimer: I'm not speaking about "playing doctor" or games of "You show me yours, and I'll show you mine." I'm talking about full-on intercourse or oral sex.

Where is it illegal for two 15 year olds to have sex? Most states in the US list out differences in age, but not for the same age.

[Noelle]

Age of consent laws.

[Torch]

Where is it illegal for two 15 year olds to have sex? Most states in the US list out differences in age, but not for the same age.

A quick check of AOC (age of consent) laws shows only four states where minors under the age of 16 can consent to sexual intercourse.

Arkansas
Colorado
Indiana
Iowa

There are six states where "age gap" laws apply, the states listed above plus Delaware and Florida. For the rest of the states, the AOC laws apply even if the other party is also under the AOC. In other words, both participants are technically breaking the law.

[MercyfulFate]

"The enforcement practices of age-of-consent laws vary depending on the social sensibilities of the particular culture (see above). Often, enforcement is not exercised to the letter of the law, with legal action being taken only when a sufficiently socially-unacceptable age gap exists between the two individuals, or if the perpetrator is in a position of authority over the minor (e.g., a teacher, minister, or doctor). The sex of each actor can also influence perceptions of an individual's guilt and therefore enforcement.[1]"

So really that's a non issue, regardless of legality. Almost nowhere is going to prosecute something like that, except in silly cases like when the minor posted pictures of his minor girlfriend and is a sex offender now.

Anyway, this is about teaching them about sex ed, which they need to know about long before they ever have sex. Many, many, many people have sex before 16.

[Torch]

"The enforcement practices of age-of-consent laws vary depending on the social sensibilities of the particular culture (see above). Often, enforcement is not exercised to the letter of the law, with legal action being taken only when a sufficiently socially-unacceptable age gap exists between the two individuals, or if the perpetrator is in a position of authority over the minor (e.g., a teacher, minister, or doctor). The sex of each actor can also influence perceptions of an individual's guilt and therefore enforcement.[1]"

So really that's a non issue, regardless of legality. Almost nowhere is going to prosecute something like that, except in silly cases like when the minor posted pictures of his minor girlfriend and is a sex offender now.

Statutory rape cases (which is what we are talking about) are prosecuted every day. Whether you want to dismiss it or not, minor children cannot consent to sexual behavior in the same way they cannot consent to legal contracts. They are minors. Period.

I'll state it again: A 12 year old child CANNOT make the choice or give consent to sexual behavior, even with another child.

[HairyHeretic]

Unfortunately that isn't going to stop them doing it.

[MercyfulFate]

Unfortunately that isn't going to stop them doing it.

Exactly, and the likelihood of two minors being prosecuted is negligible.

Abstinence only doesn't work, period. You might as well teach them how to be safe when they do have sex, otherwise teen pregnancy and STD's may occur.

[Torch]

Unfortunately that isn't going to stop them doing it.

I didn't imply otherwise. I merely wanted to clarify the intent of the AOC laws. They are there for a reason. If we didn't have them, then where exactly would we draw the line? At what point does sexual exploration morph into child sexual abuse?

[MercyfulFate]

I didn't imply otherwise. I merely wanted to clarify the intent of the AOC laws. They are there for a reason. If we didn't have them, then where exactly would we draw the line? At what point does sexual exploration morph into child sexual abuse?

It's not child sexual abuse unless there's an age difference significant enough to warrant it. Calling two 15 year olds having sex statutory rape or child abuse is confusing.

[Torch]

It's not child sexual abuse unless there's an age difference significant enough to warrant it.

You don't believe a child can sexually abuse another child close to his or her own age? Because I'd be glad to point you to several well known cases of this exact circumstance.

Calling two 15 year olds having sex statutory rape or child abuse is confusing.

Not according to the law it isn't.

I think the problem is far too many folks see 15 year olds as "almost adults". They aren't. They are minor children.

[LIAR]

It doesn't matter that they are children or that it is illegal. They're still going to do what they want be it drinking, drugs, or sex. You simply can not stop someone from doing what they want to do short of being there 100% of the time, and no parent is that vigilant. All one can really do to combat the rampant stupidity is make sure that information is stated, restated, and stated again to help their children make informed decisions.

[DarklingAlice]

It is a complex issue, this is why child on child abuse prosecutions are rare. Children cannot statutorily consent to sex, they can still willingly engage in sexual intercourse. Child on child abuse occurs when one child is unwilling. There is no way to criminalize the actions of two children willingly having sex since neither of them can statutorily consent, and thereby neither of them can be held responsible for their actions? How do you propose guilt be determined in a case where each party is willing and neither party is competent to commit the supposed crime?

Also, 13% is a significant value. If 1 in every 8 teenagers were dropping dead, or were to be infected with a particular disease, there would be a national panic. With 1 in 8 teenagers under the age of 15 exposing themselves to infectious, community based, STI's and pregnancy risk, we have a major roadblock in the attempt to curb STI infections and the high rate of unwanted teen pregnancy. This is a matter of extreme concern from a health standpoint, and I have no idea why you would want to downplay it, especially considering how distressed you seem over the idea of this 13% engaging in intercourse.

[MercyfulFate]

You don't believe a child can sexually abuse another child close to his or her own age? Because I'd be glad to point you to several well known cases of this exact circumstance.

Not according to the law it isn't.

I think the problem is far too many folks see 15 year olds as "almost adults". They aren't. They are minor children.

Two 15 years old agreeing to have sex is what I'm talking about, not actual abuse.

[Torch]

It is a complex issue, this is why child on child abuse prosecutions are rare. Children cannot statutorily consent to sex, they can still willingly engage in sexual intercourse. Child on child abuse occurs when one child is unwilling. There is no way to criminalize the actions of two children willingly having sex since neither of them can statutorily consent, and thereby neither of them can be held responsible for their actions? How do you propose guilt be determined in a case where each party is willing and neither party is competent to commit the supposed crime?

Also, 13% is a significant value. If 1 in every 8 teenagers were dropping dead, or were to be infected with a particular disease, there would be a national panic. With 1 in 8 teenagers under the age of 15 exposing themselves to infectious, community based, STI's and pregnancy risk, we have a major roadblock in the attempt to curb STI infections and the high rate of unwanted teen pregnancy. This is a matter of extreme concern from a health standpoint, and I have no idea why you would want to downplay it, especially considering how distressed you seem over the idea of this 13% engaging in intercourse.

I'm assuming this was addressed to me, but there was no quote, so I'll wing it.

What I was "downplaying" was the supposed notion that every young teen is out getting his or her freak on just because all the grown-ups have told them not to. That is a highly exaggerated picture of early adolescence, and the statistics bear this out, that the numbers based upon percentages start out low, and then increase with age to adulthood.

What I do not and have never downplayed are the risks of sexual intercourse for anyone, regardless of age. One of the fastest growing groups of new HIV transmissions are older people, above the age of 55, but I have yet to see any condom advertising geared towards the AARP set. Anyone making the choice to engage in sexual behavior should take responsibility for themselves and their partner, and that includes teenagers. Should they be given condoms along with education about abstinence? Of course. It would be foolhardy to think otherwise.

That still doesn't change the fact that minors engaging in sexual behavior (protected or not) is risky and unhealthy, and should be discouraged across the board. The two notions are not mutually exclusive.

[DarklingAlice]

<_< Yeah, should have been a quote there, sorry, scatterbrained today.

Thank you very much for the clarification. I think that everyone is pretty much in agreement, that this is a big risk being taken by a significant portion of people, but it seems like the current sticking point is on the law. I am not sure that it is productive to keep going back and forth on it though, and seems to be drifting off-topic.

Can we all agree that regardless of the law, the 13% should be taken as a sign that the law is not deterring the behavior?

And if we take that to be the case, it seems like a more profitable line of discussion, that is more in line with the OP, might be:

Do condoms promote the behavior and if so, is that a problem?

[GothicFires]

My cousin as a 11 year old daughter who has a 16 year old body. She has already had dss called on her because her daughter told people at school that she had sex... only because her friends where saying the same thing and begged the staff at her school not to tell her mother she lied.

A couple of days ago my cousin broke down in tears because she found pictures that her daughter took of herself masturbating. When asked why she did it the 11 year old replied because she 'itched and tingled there'.

So I get to have the discussion about masturbation and how she goes about pleasing her own body because we don't want her to view sex as something dirty and shameful. Education is the best gift that anyone can be given and in this day and time it is becoming earlier because we are expecting children to be young adults. it is their goal and what they supposed to be growing into.

In the state of SC the age of consent is 14. So yes... i will be buying her toys she can experiment with now and when she gets ready for the next step I will keep her supplied with condoms and even give her pointers on how to make her experience with another person more pleasurable. But it is also our hope that with this education she makes decisions based on consequences she knows can happen rather than the impulse of the moment.