Relax. Take a Breath.
Mom always says, "Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear."
Folks freakin' out about middle schools in Portland, Maine, giving away birth control pills to 11 year olds should heed such advice.
This policy is mostly geared toward kids who've failed middle school and are held back - they are older, sexually active, yet aren't allowed to go to the high school's health services and therefore need to have access to contraceptives in middle school.
So now they do.
Kids need parental permission to use the health clinic. Contraceptives prevent unwanted pregnancies, diseases and abortion.
Where's the problem?
posted by kate @ 11:15 AM
19 comments
19 Comments:
when i was 11 years old, i used birth control all the time. My looks. I turned out fine.
The way the headlines were written about this, you'd think they were handing out birth control to 6-year-olds. Way to go 4th Estate - right on top of things as usual. I guess you get more viewers (since no one READS any more) when you blow a story way out of proportion. Yes, I am that naive.....
Good one "me said". It took a few minutes, but I got it. Isn't that why paper bags have been banned?
************
Going with the conventional thinking that incompetent parenting is responsbible for irresponsible kid behavior, trying to justify that "parental permission" indicates a "responsible decision" by the parent seems a stretch of logic.
The government's secret alliance with the student that forbids informing the parent of the kid's to use birth control seems disengenious to fostering parental responsibility.
Why should be fear the Bambi's of the world when they are immunized against pregnancy and carry their own condoms. And she can probably put in on the boy of her moment without using her hands. Sort of like the final oral exam before the taking the bar.
Once again, the government is eager to take on parental responsibilites because parents are doing a bad job. But don't tell the parent. Except when it comes to killing.
That reminds me, I am gearing up for a trip to hunt sea turtle eggs. Sign up early.
The rationalization that the policy was meant for anyone other than what the policy actually says is extremely dangerous thinking. Once in place, inforcing a policy or contract reverts to the interpretation of the written word. Can we all just hear the school nurse say to an 11 year old asking for the pill say "well, wait until you have failed another two years, then I will give it to you honey." The nurse would be publicly admonished for not following District policy.
In a few years, we will be desenstizized to 11 year olds. But, in order to save our society, we will legitimize our kid's sexual behavior to save them from themselves.
The statistics I read in the science based research report showed that a few girls were satisfying the needs of a lot of boys. How unfair is that to our women?
This policy is mostly geared toward kids who've failed middle school and are held back...
This is something I hadn't heard. However, it sort of begs the question: What the hell is going wrong with that school that their level of held-back students is so high as to necessitate this sort of school wide policy?
Forgive me for not waiting my turn. And the typo's above.
I thought Kate might have some interest in this article regarding society's different perspective on male and female student's sexual abuse by teachers.
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_7227693
"Boy or girl, victims often end up with relationships framed in terms of power and control, not affection."
The related articles demonstrate a disturbing societal response to teacher/student activities. The TV series "To Catch a Predator" routinely shows the degradation of men's perspective to what use to be considered responsible adult sexual behavior. Global pedophila is being exposed due to technology.
It seems to me, in our quest to protect young girls from pregnacies and STD's, we are somehow easing the rationalization of the adults that see them as fair game.
It's sort of like vampires. Once the innocent becomes a victim, they in turn can only have relations with a victim.
That's why I carry a mirror.
If they're going to give away birth control pills, each student who receives the pills should have to hold a colicky baby for 48 hours.
regarding quakerjono's "What the hell is going wrong with that school that their level of held-back students is so high as to necessitate this sort of school wide policy?"
Good point. Perhaps the act of stopping social promotion is to blame for 11 year olds coming under governmental jurisdiction for birth control.
Jeff - Nice theory, but my active and energetic twin sons should have kept the thighs in this family permanently closed. Didn't happen. Not even with me.
WMD - No one's giving birth control to 11 year olds. Did I not say "take a breath"?
Christ.
oh my.
I am breathing.
The only disasters on earth that no one saw coming and no one could have averted are what we call "natural disasters".
The historical writing is on the walls of earth and the accurate tomes that record same.
The decline and fall of
the West Roman Empire
the East Roman Empire
the Arab empires
Spain (la decadencia)
Italian city-states
Ottoman Empire
Chinese Ch'ing dynasty
British Empire
Soviet Empire
The coming decline and fall of the US Empire.
Anton Drexler changed the course of the world. He only wanted someone in the crowd to read a booklet, sort of like "just a written policy".
He (Drexler)just didn't know who he was talking to. The booklet took a life of it's own "under new management".
Surely you must have missed the writing on the wall - you are not the one in charge of enforcing the birth control policy.
If it say's 11 year olds on the policy as reported, that is what it says, and that is how it will be enforced. I can't find the document. Do you have it?
Dear WMD,
You doth protest too much methinks. You sure do have a lot "copy/paste," material just so handy for any debate regarding birth-control, or should I say, an overweening concern for what others do with their genitals?
Dear Steve:
You speak about me as if it has some meaning. You and I, two ethereal entities passing in cyberspace. Maybe it is night. Maybe it is not.
What are your thoughts on the middle school establishing a policy that would include providing birth control pills to 11 year olds?
Or do you subscribe to the idea that, since the policy is aimed at older girls, even though the policy says 11,that part will be ignored because everyone knows the "real meaning" of the document.
How do you balance the societal issues of government vs. parental responsibility of “their” children? How does mandatory attendance in a government institution, complete with unbridled exposure to the caregiver’s worldly influence on impressionable minds, contrast to parental “rights” to raise their children as they see fit.
Are there two different standards of responsibility held for school personnel and parents? If a parent gives their 13 year old birth control pills, are they going to be seen as protecting the welfare of their child? But the school can provide the same pill under the umbrella of the welfare of the child, to protect the child from their behavior but more importantly, from the parent.
Here’s a hint. If the same behavior by a subject is valued differently, then we look to the different validator’s position of, or lack of, power and control over the subject.
Here’s a thought. Let’s pretend that I am your child’s mentor. And she and I don’t have to tell you that she and I are talking about her genitals. Because I have her best interest at heart.
Wow - all that and not a glue gun in sight. Nor a pasty.
Did you want to sign up for the sea turtle egg hunt? Reservations are limited.
Poker night this week. You know the ritual. The women limo it over to the beach house and take the yacht out for an afternoon. Me and my pals have drinks, cigars, tell raunchy stories and play poker. We make sure the front gate is on full security.
We are entertaining the thought of hiring a cocktail waitress for the evening. A perfect example of degrading women while we have their best interest at heart.
I hope Steve hasn't stood me up.
Is it because I answered the phone he is now tongue tied?
Is it because I am not an identifiable person amidst the millions that peruse blogs? In other words, does he really need to to have eye contact while he fucks me?
Is it because it is easier for Steve to attack my style than the concepts?
If I said the sky is blue, may I assume the retort would be "not when it is raining, stupid"?
Or is it that a "below the belt" comment insinuating that I had a perverse infatuation about other's genitals would send me to the proverbial showers and at the same time elevate Steve's stature amongst those who think that adolescent girls are really just a piece of ass waiting to be had?
Ok - release the hounds.
How do you balance the societal issues of government vs. parental responsibility of “their” children? How does mandatory attendance in a government institution, complete with unbridled exposure to the caregiver’s worldly influence on impressionable minds, contrast to parental “rights” to raise their children as they see fit.
You know, WMD, half the time I have no idea what the fuck you're saying. I've parsed more coherence and intelligibility from a bowl of Alphabits.
With that said, I think the quoted point is an interesting one. The notion of "mandatory attendance" isn't what it's cracked up to be anymore. After all, we're a roughly Democratic Capitalistic society that places great value on freedom, so while getting some form of basic education is highly encouraged, where that schooling takes place is no longer limited to the one room school house with grades K through 12 all in one room. There's home, parochial, public and private schooling options ranging from college preps for kindergarteners to military schools to still more alternative schooling options. If one were being snide, one might say the average parent has as many choices on where their child receives their education as they do about who provides their child's medical care.
So, when a child enters a public school, one could see this as a choice and acceptance on the part of the parent in regards to certain things, namely the "caregiver's worldly influence." Certainly a parent has a right to expect a certain level of acceptability and an amount of control, however one of the controls that parent has is their choice to allow their children to attend a public school where the message, almost by definition, is going to be broader.
It occurs to me that parents wringing their hands and worrying about birth control being available to their 11 year olds is not the issue. The issue is why their 11 year olds are asking for birth control in the first place.
And yes, Kate, I realize the focus of the policy and that it's not like some sort of contraceptive pinata where small children are blindfolded, armed with giant wooden dildos and told to beat the hell out of a paper mache vagina stuffed with birth control pills, diaphragms and condoms while screaming, "It's Like Halloween For My Naughty Bits!"...although feel free to use that concept in your class when you do a unit on Mexico. :)
quakerjono -must be scary to have an idea about what I say half the time. :)
If we analyze this issue from the point of power and control, in this case of 11-13 y/o female’s sexual behavior, I fail to see the reasoned purpose of transitioning the decision making power/responsibility from parent to public schools.
I am talking about the power that policy-making wields.
Using an extreme hypothetical situation, what if all of the 11-13 year olds were sexually active? How is a child's choice to be sexually active any different from any other behavior from a school's perspective?
There are alternative schools for students whose behavior is such that it affects their or their peer's access to the curriculum.
Do schools have the power to proactively administer behavior management drugs to behaviorally challenged students? And would they do this without informing the parent?
Did signing the consent form give permission for any drug the school seems fit to administer? If not, why are birth control pills different?
If a parent’s lack of responsible parenting is deemed necessary to act on by a governmental agency, why not make the kid’s a ward of the state first? Upon this legal shift of power, control and responsibility, I get it.
I agree with your statement that the issue should be why 11 year olds are asking for birth control in the first place. But it appears in the mean time, a decision is being made by a government agency to take responsibility and control of a child’s behavior without any due process involving the parent.
Help me understand this.
wmd - did you see the line: "Kids need parental permission to use the health clinic"?
Wedge - did you read what I wrote in the 5th paragraph?
Oooohhhh, QJ: *You* said Mexico. I didn't.
Is this vindication?
Call me crazy.
It's the truth that counts.
"Maine law prohibits having sex with a person under age 14, regardless of the age of the other person involved, Anderson said."
"A health care provider must report all known or suspected cases of sex with minors age 13 and under to the state Department of Health and Human Services, she said. Abuse also must be reported to the appropriate district attorney's office, Anderson said, when the suspected perpetrator is someone other than the minor's parent or guardian.
"When it's somebody under age 14, it is a crime and it must be reported," Anderson said. "The health care provider has no discretion in the matter. It's up to the district attorney to decide."
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=143117&ac=PHnws
I guess I'm old...since when is 14 an ok age to have sex???
Post a Comment
<< Home