or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Natural Living › Natural Parenting News › Condoms For Elementary Students? Yes, Says Mass. Town (no after all)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Condoms For Elementary Students? Yes, Says Mass. Town (no after all) - Page 2

post #21 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by witchygrrl View Post
I'm 32 now, but when I was 11, I heard other kids talking about how they have sex. Pretending the problem doesn't exist is how we get teen pregnancy/STDs. Bravo to Provincetown!
I agree.
post #22 of 48
I'm with lotusdebi & witchygrrl - whats the downside? That it costs the school an extra, what, $50-100 a year to have condoms on-hand so that if kids want them, they have access to them? If it keeps just one girl from getting pregnant, then its worth it. Cause' how many hundreds, thousands of dollars will be spent on that child's pregnancy, let alone the child itself? Vs $100 in condoms. Worth it. 100% Utterly, completely worth it.
post #23 of 48
Thread Starter 
There is an update. Read the whole thing at the link, I chose selective text to stay within copyright limitations.

No Condoms in Grade School, School Chief Says

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6633963.shtml

Massachusetts elementary school students will not be able to obtain a condom from the school nurse, a district superintendant clarified on Wednesday.

Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick, called Singer to discuss the issue and to discuss the policy's intentions.

"Comprehensive reproductive health education needs to be done in an age appropriate manner," Patrick said last week

"In those instances where local communities have agreed to make condoms available in school clinical settings, the norm - according to our Department of Public Health - is high school."
post #24 of 48
Even if you think it is saving taxpayers money in the long run and that it's the governments job to pick up wherever parents decide to leave off, I'm shocked that more people on here aren't outraged at how this takes rights away from parents though. Parents are not able to opt their children out of the program. They get no say. What if this was a vaccine? Or a medication? There would be a huge to do on here about it.
post #25 of 48
Thread Starter 
Oh I'm outraged, I just haven't been able to find a way to express it and stay within the UA.
post #26 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evie's Mama View Post
Even if you think it is saving taxpayers money in the long run and that it's the governments job to pick up wherever parents decide to leave off, I'm shocked that more people on here aren't outraged at how this takes rights away from parents though. Parents are not able to opt their children out of the program. They get no say. What if this was a vaccine? Or a medication? There would be a huge to do on here about it.
What kind of program is it? I can't really tell. It sounds like a child can ask for a condom without being overruled by parents. How his this similar to a vaccine or medication? You mean like if the school had a policy where children could ask for vaccines or drugs and not be overruled by parents?
post #27 of 48
In the program, parents are not even made aware that their children have asked for or received the condoms. All they know is that their children have access to them. And there is nothing they can do to limit that access.
post #28 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evie's Mama View Post
I'm just not ok with the government taking over anything that parents are not doing for their children. It's a shame that these children can't talk to their parents about it, but that doesn't mean the government needs to step in and do it instead then.
Maybe it's not the preferable choice, but if the kids can't get what they need from their parents or their school, where can they go? Oh well, too bad for them then? I don't think so. These kids need somewhere to turn. I say this as someone in education.

As regards to Patrick stepping in, well, if it were only kids in high school that were having sex, that would be one thing. But because there are younger kids doing it too, that needs to be addressed instead of ignored.
post #29 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post
There is an update. Read the whole thing at the link, I chose selective text to stay within copyright limitations.

No Condoms in Grade School, School Chief Says

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6633963.shtml

Massachusetts elementary school students will not be able to obtain a condom from the school nurse, a district superintendant clarified on Wednesday.

Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick, called Singer to discuss the issue and to discuss the policy's intentions.

"Comprehensive reproductive health education needs to be done in an age appropriate manner," Patrick said last week

"In those instances where local communities have agreed to make condoms available in school clinical settings, the norm - according to our Department of Public Health - is high school."
This saddens me because like witchygrrl said - its ignoring the fact that late elementary, and middle school (5-8th) maybe having and have no discreet and (I'm assuming here) confidential access to well known protections against pregnancies and STD/I.

As for parent's rights/say - when you were a kid/teen/ young adult and engaging in sexual behavior, did you ask your parents for a condom? I know I didn't, but again I was also old enough to be able to go to the store to purchase such items without raising a fuss.
If you did, that's an amazing relationship you have with them, but I think for many that relationship/openness and trust does not exist, and to think kids can buy condoms at a store - I don't think that would happen either without a commotion.
post #30 of 48
Thread Starter 
IMO 10 and 11 year olds ( which is 5th grade) shouldn't have discreet access to birth control or STD protection. If they are having sex, then it's important that parents know, because IMO 10 year olds can't consent to sex, period.

* just to clarify I was strictly making a legal argument regarding the law and consent*
post #31 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post
IMO 10 and 11 year olds ( which is 5th grade) shouldn't have discreet access to birth control or STD protection. If they are having sex, then it's important that parents know, because IMO 10 year olds can't consent to sex, period.
And yet they do. So whether we think they should, or can, they ARE having sex. Often they have nobody to turn to, for information or for access to condoms. Sure, it would be better if they weren't sexually involved at all. But since we know that some of them will be, why can't we offer them a place to turn for what protection and information we can offer?

I don't see the connection with vaccines at all. Handing a child a condom isn't going to have any long-term affects on that child's health. It's having sex that's going to do that. So the parental responsibility should be not to prevent children from having access to condoms-- it becomes to prevent the child from having the opportunity to become sexually involved, doesn't it? And the school is not interfering in that, unless we believe that merely having access to contraception will induce kids to become sexually involved when they wouldn't have done otherwise, which frankly isn't borne out by the research.

So no, I'm not outraged at all. I think it's an awesome idea, to make condoms available to kids who want to ask for them. The condom itself cannot possibly do any harm.
post #32 of 48
Thread Starter 
We are obviously defining consent in different ways.
post #33 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post
IMO 10 and 11 year olds ( which is 5th grade) shouldn't have discreet access to birth control or STD protection. If they are having sex, then it's important that parents know, because IMO 10 year olds can't consent to sex, period.
Exactly. And the law agrees. There is no state with an established age of consent of 10 or 11.
post #34 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamadelbosque View Post
I'm with lotusdebi & witchygrrl - whats the downside? That it costs the school an extra, what, $50-100 a year to have condoms on-hand so that if kids want them, they have access to them? If it keeps just one girl from getting pregnant, then its worth it. Cause' how many hundreds, thousands of dollars will be spent on that child's pregnancy, let alone the child itself? Vs $100 in condoms. Worth it. 100% Utterly, completely worth it.
It's not about the money.

The fact is that children in 5th and 6th grade are not old enough to legally consent to have sex, and depending on the age of the child's partner, this could be grounds for criminal action. In Massachusetts, the age of consent is either 16 or 18 depending on the circumstance.

So what exactly would the school nurse or counselor say to a 10 year old asking for a condom? Would they be able to ask how old the child's partner is? If a crime is involved, why would it be okay to not tell the victim's parents?

This is so very different from a 17 year old getting condoms at school. When it's a child in elementary school having sex, this is at the very least child abuse/neglect, if not rape. In every single case, imo.

The right thing to do is NOT to give the child a condom and think it's a sad situation. The right thing to do is to stop the abuse/rape by any means necessary, and the parents must absolutely be made aware of what is happening to their child.


But thank goodness the school district isn't actually giving condoms to grade schoolers.
post #35 of 48
Okay, but what about the 10 and 11 year olds having sex with each other? Who's to say that they're only having sex with older people? This is not a discussion about statutory rape, per se, though in some cases that may be true. So in that sense, would the consent laws even apply?

If it is a case of statutory rape, then of course that needs to be followed through legally, but even still, I'd rather that condoms be available so it's not a case of pregnancy/STIs on top of it. Stat rape is bad enough, and if that's suspected, then I would hope that an investigation be done.
post #36 of 48
Thread Starter 
AFAIK, it's a state juristictional thing. While we think of statutory rape laws as ones that protect the younger party from those older it depending on state law it can apply to both if both are below the legal age of consent.

Doing a quick google search http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm

The lowest age of consent in any US state is 14. And here we are arguing over 10 year olds.
post #37 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by witchygrrl View Post
Okay, but what about the 10 and 11 year olds having sex with each other? Who's to say that they're only having sex with older people? This is not a discussion about statutory rape, per se, though in some cases that may be true. So in that sense, would the consent laws even apply?

If it is a case of statutory rape, then of course that needs to be followed through legally, but even still, I'd rather that condoms be available so it's not a case of pregnancy/STIs on top of it. Stat rape is bad enough, and if that's suspected, then I would hope that an investigation be done.
If it's two 10 year olds, don't you still think the parents should be told? I would consider this to be child neglect on the part of the adult who knows what the children are doing if the parents are not informed. Depending on the circumstances, the parents might be neglectful, as well.

Is it not reasonable for the parents of a 10 year old be given the right and the opportunity to stop their child from having sex?

I don't believe 10 year olds should have the right to have sex whenever they want. Yes, STIs and pregnancy should definitely be prevented, but that prevention should not be from a condom but rather from stopping the sexual activity.
post #38 of 48
I am taking neither side, but around here elementary school goes to 6th grade and there was more than 1 13 year old sixth grader in my children's school.

Additionally, condoms are not only protective in vaginal intercourse.
post #39 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evie's Mama View Post
In the program, parents are not even made aware that their children have asked for or received the condoms. All they know is that their children have access to them. And there is nothing they can do to limit that access.
OK, I see where you are coming from, but I don't really see it in the was as a medicine or vaccine (unless they were giving it to her in a sealed container, not injecting it into her body), but I agree that consent can't be given at the younger ages, so as a parent I would want to know. But now it sounds like this is a high school thing.
post #40 of 48
Oh, dont' worry I agree - 10 yr olds shouldn't have sex w/ each other. And yet, it happens. Should we keep them from doing it safely? Yes, we should try to keep them from doing it altogether, but that does *NOT* change the fact that it does and will happen. So wheres the harm in allowing them to have *ACCESS* to condoms?? Doesn't mean they have to get one, doesn't mean that if they have one they will use it. Just means that if they want to have sex, they can do so *safely*. Wheres the harm in that?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Natural Parenting News
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Natural Living › Natural Parenting News › Condoms For Elementary Students? Yes, Says Mass. Town (no after all)