UK teen celibacy

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Bifta

I also believe scaring people into abstinence is also a very good thing, given the choice between conversing with Harry Palm and a nice festering bunch of b-cell lymphoma's ... what would you choose?

Just to make sure: You think scaring people is a good educational strategy?

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by danielf

Just to make sure: You think scaring people is a good educational strategy?

What do you tell a child who's reaching for a boiling kettle? "Don't touch that, you'll burn yourself!"

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Bifta

You know both sides of the story, unless you're very naive sexually.

A) You have sex, you wear protection, you still run the risk of contracting a terminal sexually transmitted disease, you also run the risk if you're promiscious of spreading it around.

or

B) You don't have sex, you don't contract a sexually transmitted disease.

I think the problem (well, one of the problems) is that a lot of teens *do* seem to be very naive sexually. The UK has a stupidly high teen pregnancy rate.

And that all surely comes down to sex education. Education from their parents. Education at school. Education that sadly seems to be lacking.

Kids need to be properly taught about sex, & contraception, & so on. And they need to be taught the *consequences* of having unprotected sex.

Just telling them not to have sex surely won't prepare them at all, as, studies have shown, they'll just end up doing it anyway, & will know even less about it if they've been on abstinence programmes.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Bifta

Proven where?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...166168,00.html


Not "proven", but still not exactly a glowing recommendation for abstinence programmes

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by danielf

Just to make sure: You think scaring people is a good educational strategy?

Wasn't aimed at me, & Bifta made an opposite point, but....

I think scaring them into always using condoms (& preferably not sleeping around) would be a good idea. They need to know the consequences of un-safe sex.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Tezcatlipoca

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...166168,00.html


Not "proven", but still not exactly a glowing recommendation for abstinence programmes

When every single study shows it doesn't work, that's considered proof

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by Tezcatlipoca

I think the problem (well, one of the problems) is that a lot of teens *do* seem to be very naive sexually. The UK has a stupidly high teen pregnancy rate.

And that all surely comes down to sex education. Education from their parents. Education at school. Education that sadly seems to be lacking.

Kids need to be properly taught about sex, & contraception, & so on. And they need to be taught the *consequences* of having unprotected sex.

Just telling them not to have sex surely won't prepare them at all, as, studies have shown, they'll just end up doing it anyway, & will know even less about it if they've been on abstinence programmes.

The two Canadians I know that have chosen to abstain are fully aware of the possible consequences of sexual intercourse, sex education was taught at my school (16 years ago, so presumably it still is?) highlighting in graphic detail what you could contract and exactly what it will do to you, and believe me no-one wants to contract one or a multitude of the ailments people get in the advanced stages of AIDS.

I think the quote from the article originally quoted sums it up perfectly:

Abstinence is the only way truly to protect yourself against getting a sexually transmitted disease

I don't think anyone can argue with that.

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

When every single study shows it doesn't work, that's considered proof

Well, it's only as good as the people participating, if someone who claims to have abstained from sex is actually having sex then they're not really abstaining so it'd be a bit pointless saying abstinence doesn't work.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Bifta

What do you tell a child who's reaching for a boiling kettle? "Don't touch that, you'll burn yourself!"

good point. However, does the same apply when you know the kid will get to the kettle sooner (rather) than later? I say tell the kid about temperature and scalding etc. Hopefully, the kid will appproach the kettle sensibly.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Bifta

Proven where?

Another story...this time Texas....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

Texas Teaches Abstinence, With Mixed Grades

By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, January 21, 2003

"You have been lied to, lied to by the media, lied to by celebrities," Ed Ainsworth told the 120 squirming eighth-graders at Smylie Wilson Junior High School. "Will this condom protect your heart?" he asked, flashing a glossy Trojan ad on a giant screen. "Will this condom protect your reputation? Go ahead and use a condom. You'll still be known as a slut."

This is sex education, Texas-style, where the only safe sex taught since 1995 is no sex outside marriage. That is when George W. Bush, who was then governor, signed a law making Texas the third state requiring schools to follow an abstinence-only sex education curriculum.

(snip)

In the seven years since their schools began teaching abstinence-only, young people here have been anything but abstinent. Teen pregnancy rates in the state remain above the national average, and Lubbock County consistently has one of the highest rates in the state. In addition, the number of Texas youths with sexually transmitted diseases has risen steadily.

At the same time, many parents lack the time or expertise to provide adequate guidance. Teachers complain that even if the law did not limit what they could teach, the school day already is packed. And young people are living in a culture that features both regular church attendance and provocative music videos.

Now, a small group of students is revolting against the abstinence-only curriculum.

"The current policies are obviously ineffective," said Corey Nichols, 17, who, as mayor of the Lubbock Youth Commission, is leading a push for a more comprehensive program. "I think abstinence is wonderful; as a commission we back abstinence. But when you look at the numbers, you see the abstinence curriculum fails."

(snip)

Since the abstinence-only curriculum began in 1995, teen pregnancy rates have fallen in Texas generally -- and Lubbock County specifically -- but not as dramatically as for the nation as a whole. Meanwhile, rates of sexually transmitted diseases have soared.

(snip)

Over the last decade, as rates for gonorrhea and chlamydia have fallen nationally, Lubbock County has confronted an epidemic

(snip)

What has persisted, Lubbock residents say, is a culture of teen sexual activity.

"We've got a lot of kids for whom the norm is to be a high school dropout and pregnant well before she is 18," said Eric Benson, who coordinates HIV programs in the Lubbock area for the Texas Department of Health. "We have instances where a girl has her first child at 15, becomes a grandmother by the time she is 30 and a great-grandmother at age 45."

(snip)

Many teenagers said that with the limits on teaching, and with parents who are uncomfortable discussing sex in detail, they learn much of what they know from experience. Some young women here, under the mistaken belief that they can get pregnant through oral sex, refer to their children as "spit babies."

"I learned the hard way," said Jennifer Villarreal, 19, who gave birth two years ago. "You can continue to talk about abstinence, but kids are curious and they will experiment."

Even teenagers who have taken a virginity pledge see a community in which sexual activity -- often risky, promiscuous behavior -- is a routine part of growing up.

(big snip)

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Tezcatlipoca

Wasn't aimed at me, & Bifta made an opposite point, but....

I think scaring them into always using condoms (& preferably not sleeping around) would be a good idea. They need to know the consequences of un-safe sex.

I can't argue with that, though I'd stress education rather than scaring.

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by danielf

good point. However, does the same apply when you know the kid will get to the kettle sooner (rather) than later? I say tell the kid about temperature and scalding etc. Hopefully, the kid will appproach the kettle sensibly.

I'm not disagreeing with that in the slightest, but if you tell someone the effects of Gonorrhea, Syphilis or AIDS then it's going to put the wind up them, it's unavoidable.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Bifta

Well, it's only as good as the people participating, if someone who claims to have abstained from sex is actually having sex then they're not really abstaining so it'd be a bit pointless saying abstinence doesn't work.

Abstinence (the concept itself), would, if strictly adhered, obviously work.

What doesn't really seem to work though, are the abstinence programmes. Why? Because, going by various reports & studies, the kids do still end up having sex - perhaps later than "normal", but they still have sex. And they are less likely to know about, or use, condoms, and so on...(as per the Texas link above, & the overall US study linked earlier)

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by Tezcatlipoca

Abstinence (the concept itself), would, if strictly adhered, obviously work.

What doesn't really seem to work though, are the abstinence programmes. Why? Because, going by various reports & studies, the kids do still end up having sex - perhaps later than "normal", but they still have sex. And they are less likely to know about, or use, condoms, and so on...(as per the Texas link above, & the overall US study linked earlier)

I agree, but, if these programs based themselves around initially educating their "members" (poor choice of phrase) properly then there wouldn't be a problem. I suspect some of the states in the USA which are fairly religious don't want such things as sex, STD's and teenage pregnancy discussed.

edit: must go to bed, nearly 2am!

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Bifta

Well, it's only as good as the people participating, if someone who claims to have abstained from sex is actually having sex then they're not really abstaining so it'd be a bit pointless saying abstinence doesn't work.

I'm saying these schemes to get people to abstaine don't work.
They do more damage than good in that they concentrate on abstainence and don't deal with safer sex, well what's the point if you're not having sex? Problem is, most don't abstain forever and eventually have sex, but then have no idea about contraception or protection.

As for sex ed, too little too late. Kids need it before they start having sex not after.
Maybe we should look to Holland for how to educate kids as they seem to have got it right.

When I become a father I'll be digging out my copy of aunty Claire's Body book and starting from there with my kids