should birth control be available to minors? (1 Viewer)

[FallingPianos]

what are your thoughts on this? how available should BC be without parental consent?

 

[talloulou]

Condoms should be readily and easily available to minors. Birth control is a medication taken daily though and as a parent I feel I have the right to know my child is taking a certain drug. Now for me this doesn't present a problem as I would encourage my child to go on birth control if she were having sex at 15. I know some parents would choose to ignore the problem and not help their child be safe. But just as I don't think abortions should be allowed without parental consent I think birth control should be the same. There's a reason minors are "minors" and parents have a job to do. I want to parent my child. I don't want the government making laws that take my parental role away.

 

[FallingPianos]

Condoms should be readily and easily available to minors. Birth control is a medication taken daily though and as a parent I feel I have the right to know my child is taking a certain drug. Now for me this doesn't present a problem as I would encourage my child to go on birth control if she were having sex at 15. I know some parents would choose to ignore the problem and not help their child be safe. But just as I don't think abortions should be allowed without parental consent I think birth control should be the same. There's a reason minors are "minors" and parents have a job to do. I want to parent my child. I don't want the government making laws that take my parental role away.

thats pretty much how I feel. I'm not sure how I would react if it was my own kid. i'd want them to wait until they were out of highschool, but I wouldnt want them to be having unsafe sex either. I think i'd probably tell them I expect them to wait... but also make sure they're aware that they can get BC for free or cheap at PP without my knowledge.

 

[talloulou]

thats pretty much how I feel. I'm not sure how I would react if it was my own kid. i'd want them to wait until they were out of highschool, but I wouldnt want them to be having unsafe sex either. I think i'd probably tell them I expect them to wait... but also make sure they're aware that they can get BC for free or cheap at PP without my knowledge.

Personally I'd rather take my daughter to a gynecologist where I know she'll get the best care vs. having her go to the sex clinic! :rofl Plus I'd want to pay for the pills so that they were taken consistently and she didn't miss taking them 'cause she was low on money or something. I'd obviously prefer she wait as long as possible but I wouldn't push it to much out of fear that she would just not tell me what she was doing.

 

[FallingPianos]

Personally I'd rather take my daughter to a gynecologist where I know she'll get the best care vs. having her go to the sex clinic! :rofl Plus I'd want to pay for the pills so that they were taken consistently and she didn't miss taking them 'cause she was low on money or something. I'd obviously prefer she wait as long as possible but I wouldn't push it to much out of fear that she would just not tell me what she was doing.

I think a lot of it would depend on the teen herself. If my daughter had good common sense, nice boyfriends, and was responsible, i'd be a lot more permissive.

hopefully by the time I'd be having to worry about this men would have more options open to them. if not, i'd be more cautious with a son because I couldnt know how responsible his girlfriend was about taking pills on time etc... if she was on anything at all. and if he gets her pregnant he has no options available to him.

i dont want it to sound like I wouldnt want them to speak to me either. i just think it would be better if it was on their own terms, as long as I know they know what to do. if they were an older teen who was responsible etc, its something I would disapprove of, but not something I would punish. the difficult part is making them understand that.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

The poll needs a "sure, with parental consent" choice. 'tis pointless without it.

That being said....absent consent should minors get contraceptives?

No. They're a drug and the school not only can't give a kid an aspirin without signed consent and possibly a prescription from his doctor, THE KID can't carry aspirins in class.

There's been cases of girl students getting suspended for possession of that deadly drug, Midol. So let's be real.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Condoms should be readily and easily available to minors. Birth control is a medication taken daily though and as a parent I feel I have the right to know my child is taking a certain drug. Now for me this doesn't present a problem as I would encourage my child to go on birth control if she were having sex at 15. I know some parents would choose to ignore the problem and not help their child be safe. But just as I don't think abortions should be allowed without parental consent I think birth control should be the same. There's a reason minors are "minors" and parents have a job to do. I want to parent my child. I don't want the government making laws that take my parental role away.

Again, this isn't a decision bureaucratic school boards and teachers unions are qualified to make. Requesting condoms is clear evidence that the petitioner is planning on getting something wet, and it's obvious that the parents should have a say in the exercise of that decision.

When the school board members are willing to take life-time responsibility for raising all children produced while their student was under the protection of condoms they issued, then they'll have a some grounds to speak on this issue. Until they can demonstrate an personal or financial interest in the matter, they've no business playing "restroom vending machine".

One thing is certain, lack of access to contraceptives, lack of access to condoms, and elimination of abortions on demand, would be almost as effective as supergluing the thighs of the nations teenage girls together.

We should try it.

 

[americanwoman]

Personally I'd rather take my daughter to a gynecologist where I know she'll get the best care vs. having her go to the sex clinic! :rofl Plus I'd want to pay for the pills so that they were taken consistently and she didn't miss taking them 'cause she was low on money or something. I'd obviously prefer she wait as long as possible but I wouldn't push it to much out of fear that she would just not tell me what she was doing.

I agree. There are also benefits to being on the pill for women such as regulating them and it lessens cramps. I think it's best to educate young kids on safe sex as early as possible. Have someone with aids or herpes go to schools and give the kids a dose of reality.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

All of the barriers should be available to minors of any age. If the parents were to withhold consent, they would also be withholding consent from sexual activity-- and if the child feels the need to secure birth control at that point, they are obviously not minding their parents' wishes in this regard.

Prescription birth control medications, by regulating hormones, have far more implications for the child's overall health and physical development, and should thus only be available with parental consent.

 

[Kandahar]

The poll needs a "sure, with parental consent" choice. 'tis pointless without it.

That being said....absent consent should minors get contraceptives?

No. They're a drug and the school not only can't give a kid an aspirin without signed consent and possibly a prescription from his doctor, THE KID can't carry aspirins in class.

There's been cases of girl students getting suspended for possession of that deadly drug, Midol. So let's be real.

So you're using idiotic policies related to aspirin to justify even MORE idiotic policies related to birth control pills?

Of course minors should have access to them. It's just common sense to not deny medication to someone who is willing to pay for it and can benefit from it. Just because someone is under 18 doesn't mean that they're a serf and that their parents are totalitarian dictators.

 

[Stace]

The poll needs a "sure, with parental consent" choice. 'tis pointless without it.

That being said....absent consent should minors get contraceptives?

No. They're a drug and the school not only can't give a kid an aspirin without signed consent and possibly a prescription from his doctor, THE KID can't carry aspirins in class.

There's been cases of girl students getting suspended for possession of that deadly drug, Midol. So let's be real.

Who said anything about schools handing out birth control pills?

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

So you're using idiotic policies related to aspirin to justify even MORE idiotic policies related to birth control pills?

Of course minors should have access to them. It's just common sense to not deny medication to someone who is willing to pay for it and can benefit from it. Just because someone is under 18 doesn't mean that they're a serf and that their parents are totalitarian dictators.

The reasoning behind the policy re:aspirin is perfectly sound. The school isn't the minor's parent nor it's guardian. It neither has the authority to make non-urgent medical decisions regarding that child's welfare nor should it accept the risk of liability inherent in overriding parental authority.

What part of "minor" are you too young to understand? Got any kids? Don't say this question is irrelevent, because it most certainly reflects on your involvment in the issue.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Who said anything about schools handing out birth control pills?

Schools. You know, the place where kids' minds are warped out shape by liberals and unionists. The place where safe application of a condom on a banana is more important than the Chain Rule. The most likely place in this society where kids are going to request contraceptives if they're available.

Want to expand it? No place should give minors any form of contraception, including condoms, without parental consent.

 

[DeeJayH]

so long as a parent is responsible for a child in their care, than NOTHING should be available to minors without that parents consent
The morals and values of the child are to be instilled by the parents, and who they chose to expose them to.,
it is nobodys place to undermine the way any parents wish to raise their child, with the obvious exception of abuse

some parents have no problem giving their kid all kinds of BC at a young age
whereas others are more strict in their beleifs and refuse to encourage behaviour they do not approve of

either way it is the parents decision
not the government, not the doctor, not the clerk at the 7-11

 

[DeeJayH]

All of the barriers should be available to minors of any age. If the parents were to withhold consent, they would also be withholding consent from sexual activity-- and if the child feels the need to secure birth control at that point, they are obviously not minding their parents' wishes in this regard.

Prescription birth control medications, by regulating hormones, have far more implications for the child's overall health and physical development, and should thus only be available with parental consent.

thats a very good point, on both basic forms of BC
but it still undermines the parents role and responsibility, and therefor i can not agree with it
i get what you are saying, but it is still wrong IMO

 

[Kandahar]

The reasoning behind the policy re:aspirin is perfectly sound. The school isn't the minor's parent nor it's guardian. It neither has the authority to make non-urgent medical decisions

How is giving a child an aspirin more of a "medical decision" than, say, giving a child a carton of milk? Should parents have to sign a form allowing that too?

regarding that child's welfare nor should it accept the risk of liability inherent in overriding parental authority.

If the parents have such an unreasonable request of the school, the onus should be on them to make it clear. And even then, they'd better have a good explanation for it.

Furthermore, no one is talking about schools handing out birth control pills, so this entire line of argument is a poorly conceived strawman.

What part of "minor" are you too young to understand?

Parents do not have absolute authority over their children, especially children old enough to be on birth control.

Got any kids? Don't say this question is irrelevent, because it most certainly reflects on your involvment in the issue.

Ever immigrated from Mexico? Ever spent 18 years in an anti-American madrass? Ever had a religious text written about you? Then you are unqualified to comment on those things. :roll:

 

[::Major_Baker::]

yeah, teenage pregnacies and teenage STDs are a much better result.:roll:
Sometimes, it pays to think practically.

Kids will have sex. Help them make it safe!

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

How is giving a child an aspirin more of a "medical decision" than, say, giving a child a carton of milk? Should parents have to sign a form allowing that too?

Clearly, someone isn't aware that aspirin is a drug.:roll:

If the parents have such an unreasonable request of the school, the onus should be on them to make it clear. And even then, they'd better have a good explanation for it.

Unreasonable? To control what drugs their child is given is unreasonable? Besides which, the rules against medicating in schools protect the school at least as much as the parent.

Furthermore, no one is talking about schools handing out birth control pills, so this entire line of argument is a poorly conceived strawman.

Fact of the matter is that one of the controversies in today's society is exactly that, the disbursement of contraceptives, including drugs, in public school without the knowledge or consent of the parent.

Since contraceptive medications are controlled substances available only by prescription, only places like Planned Parenthood would be able to dispense them, and they certainly have "outreach" projects in various schools.

You focus on "schools" is the strawman here. Geez, try learning about the topic before you start spewing.

Parents do not have absolute authority over their children, especially children old enough to be on birth control.

Of course they do. No one else does. Parents are the ones with absolute financial liability, too, which definitely makes it their business, even when we ignore the obvious medical and psychological aspects of the issue.

Again, what part of "minor" do you not understand?

 

[Stace]

Schools. You know, the place where kids' minds are warped out shape by liberals and unionists. The place where safe application of a condom on a banana is more important than the Chain Rule. The most likely place in this society where kids are going to request contraceptives if they're available.

Want to expand it? No place should give minors any form of contraception, including condoms, without parental consent.

Nowhere in this thread have I seen anyone imply that schools should just be handing out birth control pills. Teenage girls, however, CAN go to Planned Parenthood and receive them, either for free or at very low cost. That's where I got mine. And thought I didn't need parental consent to obtain the pills, my mom knew I was getting them. However, not all teens are comfortable talking to their parents about such matters, nor are all parents comfortable talking to their teens about it.....sorry, but I'd rather have my kids not willing to talk to me and practicing safe sex, then to have them not able to obtain some sort of contraceptive and therefore having unsafe sex.

This has nothing to do with "liberals and unionists". And I don't know what kind of school you went to, but none of the schools I attended taught us how to put a condom on a banana, though that really is a pretty practical thing to learn, so that when kids do have sex, regardless of if they go out that night and do it, or wait another 5 years, they know how to put it on CORRECTLY and PROPERLY.

 

[Kandahar]

Clearly, someone isn't aware that aspirin is a drug.:roll:

Please define "drug" in terms that 1) include aspirin, 2) exclude milk, 3) aren't stupid.

Unreasonable? To control what drugs their child is given is unreasonable?

For something as minor as aspirin, yes.

Fact of the matter is that one of the controversies in today's society is exactly that, the disbursement of contraceptives, including drugs, in public school without the knowledge or consent of the parent.

Well that isn't the controversy that this thread is about. Try sticking to the subject.

Since contraceptive medications are controlled substances available only by prescription, only places like Planned Parenthood would be able to dispense them, and they certainly have "outreach" projects in various schools.

Do they distribute birth control pills in schools without parents' permission? Please give me the link to this news story, or admit that you're full of ****.

You focus on "schools" is the strawman here. Geez, try learning about the topic before you start spewing.

YOU brought up schools, not me.

Of course they do. No one else does. Parents are the ones with absolute financial liability, too, which definitely makes it their business, even when we ignore the obvious medical and psychological aspects of the issue.

Again, what part of "minor" do you not understand?

So if a parent believes that the best cure for a child's headache is a dose of rat poison, no one has the right to tell them otherwise. Brilliant.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Nowhere in this thread have I seen anyone imply that schools should just be handing out birth control pills. Teenage girls, however, CAN go to Planned Parenthood and receive them, either for free or at very low cost. That's where I got mine. And thought I didn't need parental consent to obtain the pills, my mom knew I was getting them. However, not all teens are comfortable talking to their parents about such matters, nor are all parents comfortable talking to their teens about it.....sorry, but I'd rather have my kids not willing to talk to me and practicing safe sex, then to have them not able to obtain some sort of contraceptive and therefore having unsafe sex.

This has nothing to do with "liberals and unionists". And I don't know what kind of school you went to, but none of the schools I attended taught us how to put a condom on a banana, though that really is a pretty practical thing to learn, so that when kids do have sex, regardless of if they go out that night and do it, or wait another 5 years, they know how to put it on CORRECTLY and PROPERLY.

1) Planned Parent should be REQUIRED to obtain parental consent before dispensing any medication or treatment of any sort to any minor child. Period. No exceptions.

2) Or..Planned Parenthood can pay all child support costs of any babies produced as a result of their usurpation of parental authority, as well as emotional damages on the order of millions of dollars to the distraught parents.

It's practical to learn how to put condoms on bananas? Couldn't the girls and boys so inclined for that sort of act just wash the thing?

Amazing, though, how everyone assumes that the frequency of teenage sex will simply remain constant if easy access to contraceptives isn't maintained. Are girls that stupid in your part of the country?

What ever happened to raising the real self-worth of girls by teaching them that abstinence is a virtue? Is there any particular reason this society has to treat young girls as sluts-in-training?

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Please define "drug" in terms that 1) include aspirin, 2) exclude milk, 3) aren't stupid.

Any substance ingested, injected, supposited, or absorbed into the body to alter the body's biochemical and physiological responses that isn't food.

For something as minor as aspirin, yes.

Reyes Syndrome. Allergies. Ignorance, arrrghh!

Well that isn't the controversy that this thread is about. Try sticking to the subject.

I am sticking to the subject. You just can't handle it.

Do they distribute birth control pills in schools without parents' permission? Please give me the link to this news story, or admit that you're full of ****.

They certainly do. Try reading the news, try doing your own research, try paying attention to current events. There are laws permitting abortions for minors without parental consent, and there are laws permitting distribution of contraceptives without parental consent, and both types of laws permit the courts to supplant the parent and to NOT NOTIFY the minor child's parent of these activities.

YOU brought up schools, not me.

That's because schools are relevant.

So if a parent believes that the best cure for a child's headache is a dose of rat poison, no one has the right to tell them otherwise. Brilliant.

You may think your analogy is brilliant. Looks pretty lame on this end. That sodden strawman the best you can do?

 

[Stace]

1) Planned Parent should be REQUIRED to obtain parental consent before dispensing any medication or treatment of any sort to any minor child. Period. No exceptions.

Well, that's just your opinion, and while you're entitled to it, currently, certain state laws disagree with you.

2) Or..Planned Parenthood can pay all child support costs of any babies produced as a result of their usurpation of parental authority, as well as emotional damages on the order of millions of dollars to the distraught parents.

Uh...no. Especially seeing as how FEWER babies would be born with proper usage of birth control. Why should Planned Parenthood be blamed if a pregnancy ensues? Most teens go there because their parents won't take them to the family doctor, or because they can't afford the prescription at regular cost. As far as that first scenario goes, why should PP be blamed for trying to help teens be responsible and safe, when their own parents don't care?

It's practical to learn how to put condoms on bananas? Couldn't the girls and boys so inclined for that sort of act just wash the thing?

Wash the banana? :roll:

Amazing, though, how everyone assumes that the frequency of teenage sex will simply remain constant if easy access to contraceptives isn't maintained. Are girls that stupid in your part of the country?

Well, seeing as how I've lived in multiple areas of the country, I'm going to have to say no, unless you'd like to imply that the majority of teenage girls today are "stupid". No one said anything about teen sex rates remaining constant, although, yes, if teens want to have sex, they're going to, regardless of if contraception is availabe to them. Some of them are willing to take the risks that go along with unsafe sex....they do it now, even with certain contraceptions being available to them.

What ever happened to raising the real self-worth of girls by teaching them that abstinence is a virtue? Is there any particular reason this society has to treat young girls as sluts-in-training?

You can preach abstinence all you like, that doesn't mean that anyone will listen. My mom preached it to me many times, but in the end, I decided that I'd rather have sex. I certainly didn't measure my self worth by it, though. I would have felt just as good or bad about myself without having had sex. That being said, I DID feel better about the fact that while my mom didn't like it, she accepted my decision and helped me to make smart choices about it all. That showed me that she thought of me NOT as a child, but as someone of an age to make responsible and informed choices on my own; it showed that she recognized that I was rapidly approaching adulthood and that she could no longer make all of my choices for me.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Well, that's just your opinion, and while you're entitled to it, currently, certain state laws disagree with you.

Ah, yes, the old "I know I can't defend the morality of what I say, so I'll hide behind existing law" cop out.

Uh...no. Especially seeing as how FEWER babies would be born with proper usage of birth control.

Oh, yes, children are nothing but bunnies incapable of making choices. That's why we give them abortions on demand, after all.

Why should Planned Parenthood be blamed if a pregnancy ensues?

Assuming they provided contraceptives in disobedience to the parent's wishes, they've assumed the responsibility that comes with their action. Explain why they should not be financially liable? They're the ones at encouraging irresponsible behavior, aren't they?

Most teens go there because their parents won't take them to the family doctor, or because they can't afford the prescription at regular cost.

Oh, you mean some parents say "no". What a shock. So when a parent says "don't put beans in your ear", you ran out to the local Mexican to get beans anyway, right?

As far as that first scenario goes, why should PP be blamed for trying to help teens be responsible and safe, when their own parents don't care?

Well there's a totally bullshit assumption that explains the fallacy of your entire viewpoint. Just because the parents say "no", it doesn't mean they don't care. What an asinine thing to say.

It's far more reasonable to assume that the parents ARE trying to teach the kid to be responsible and safe. After all, the safest and most responsible thing to do, physically, is to tell the boy to go paint the ceiling. The girl's father should be the one to deliver this message, of course.

Well, seeing as how I've lived in multiple areas of the country, I'm going to have to say no, unless you'd like to imply that the majority of teenage girls today are "stupid".

Oh, well then, they can learn that the most satisfying interactions between people aren't those requiring naked bodies rubbing frantically together. Cats and earthworms do that, too.

No one said anything about teen sex rates remaining constant, although, yes, if teens want to have sex, they're going to, regardless of if contraception is availabe to them.

You're sort of weak on the theory of how marketplace choices affect personal decisions, aren't you?

Some of them are willing to take the risks that go along with unsafe sex....they do it now, even with certain contraceptions being available to them.

Yeah, there's always been sluts. Now there's so many of them it's considered the norm. Clearly this is good for teenage boys and pedophile men, but it's not the best course for society to take.

You can preach abstinence all you like, that doesn't mean that anyone will listen. My mom preached it to me many times, but in the end, I decided that I'd rather have sex. I certainly didn't measure my self worth by it, though. I would have felt just as good or bad about myself without having had sex. That being said, I DID feel better about the fact that while my mom didn't like it, she accepted my decision and helped me to make smart choices about it all. That showed me that she thought of me NOT as a child, but as someone of an age to make responsible and informed choices on my own; it showed that she recognized that I was rapidly approaching adulthood and that she could no longer make all of my choices for me.

It's not really about sex, now, is it? I mean, when my teenage stepdaughter let some loser dweeb take her cherry, as responsible parents we had him arrested because he was eighteen and four years older than her, and we got her on the pill because we're not stupid.

Headstrong young fool she was (still is), we figured that she'd have a baby football team or something if we didn't at least stop the ovulations.

But should these decisions be taken away from the parents? No. Again, people that argue yes are confused about the meaning of the concept of "minor child". And increasing the availability of contraceptions and removing control of access to them from the parent weakens the authority of the parent and destroys their ability to guide the child's moral growth.

 

[FallingPianos]

The poll needs a "sure, with parental consent" choice. 'tis pointless without it.

That being said....absent consent should minors get contraceptives?

No. They're a drug and the school not only can't give a kid an aspirin without signed consent and possibly a prescription from his doctor, THE KID can't carry aspirins in class.

There's been cases of girl students getting suspended for possession of that deadly drug, Midol. So let's be real.

I meant without parental consent, implying that it would be allowed with it. sorry for being unclear.