Posted on 06/10/2002 4:35:38 AM PDT by Pern
Isolated incidents of oral sex on campus and talk among middle-school students of the behavior occurring at off-campus parties has alarmed some Fayette County school administrators and parents who plan meetings on the topic.
Physicians, including one who has seen an increase in sexually transmitted diseases among middle school students, and other professionals are promoting frank discussions about oral sex to discourage students from engaging in it. Still, all agree the practice is limited to a small number of students, some of whom do not equate oral sex to intercourse.
Since Beaumont Middle School principal Tom Mowery wrote to parents in December asking them "to be aware of the prevalence of oral sex at off-campus parties at the middle-school level," administrators at one school referred an incident to law enforcement, and administrators at another school, Jessie Clark Middle, called in parents to discuss a situation.
Diane Woods, the district's middle school director, put the topic on the agenda for a future principals meeting. She said she was notified of a report of oral sex occurring between two students on campus at Tates Creek Middle School several weeks ago.
Without releasing specifics, Tates Creek Middle School assistant principal Earl Stivers said the incident was investigated "both by law enforcement and administratively."
Students' remarks have made doctors and parents fear the activity is more widespread.
Dr. Hatim Omar, a University of Kentucky specialist in adolescent medicine, said that just since January, he has treated at least 10 middle school-age students for sexually transmitted diseases they said they had contracted through oral sex. That's up from six cases in 2001 and two each in 1999 and 2000.
Four students, treated for tonsillitis caused by gonorrhea, attributed their conditions to so-called "head parties," Omar said.
Also since January, he has seen students from every middle school in Fayette County who admit that they have engaged in oral sex or attended parties where students have engaged in oral sex.
Parents and administrators are responding. Besides principals addressing the topic, Beaumont PTA president Debbie Boian wants middle school PTA leaders to discuss developing programs at each school to talk to students about risky behavior.
"It's easy to say, 'Oh those kids are just bragging about having oral sex,'" Boian said. "But if there is any truth to it, you should" address the issue.
Nationally, public-health experts report that teen-agers appear to be engaging in high-risk sexual practices without caution and with alarming casualness. Nearly 1 in 10 reports losing his or her virginity before the age of 13, a 15 percent increase since 1997, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. According to several surveys, as many as half of teens ages 13 to 19 say they have had oral sex. Other communities across the country are grappling with the problem and are instituting policies that require more supervision and education.
Lexington pediatrician Tom Pauly said his patients are asking him about oral sex and telling him they think it's safer than vaginal intercourse.
"It's a new issue," said Bryan Station Middle Counselor Lynette Schmiedeknecht. "It's more part of the culture, more talked about. It seems that in talking with the kids, they don't consider oral sex (to be) sex. They just think it's something they do as an adolescent."
Dealing with incidents directly and speaking bluntly with middle school students is key to helping them understand the ramifications of their decisions, parents and doctors said. Damage to reputations and illnesses are two of the dangers.
"We advise them to abstain," Pauly said. "We talk about medical complications and the psychosocial complications of engaging in oral sex at such a young age."
After Jessie Clark Middle students talked about the popularity of oral sex with an assistant principal this spring, principal Steve Carmichael said: "We invited two moms to come in and shared our concerns. It wasn't a conversation as awkward as you might think. We would rather overreact than underreact."
The issue isn't a routine part of sex education classes, officials said.
Mike Kennedy, acting health education coordinator, said that until 1990, the district had a sex education curriculum. But now, site-based councils at each school are responsible for deciding what kind of sex education is dispensed, he said.
Seven middle schools offer programs that teach abstinence only, Kennedy said. Other schools cover sex education in health classes. But Kennedy said he doesn't think oral sex is discussed anywhere as part of the middle school curriculum.
At Beaumont, principal Mowery said the quick intervention -- writing to parents -- was successful. Parents responded to meetings about how to discuss sexual issues with their children. And as the year progressed, counselors and administrators had fewer kids talking about the parties.
Only a small minority of students have actually had oral sex, Mowery thinks.
"Ninety percent of our kids," he said, "make good decisions in every aspect of their lives."
Very good point. The whole sexual liberation fantasy is a house built on sand. It depends on smoke and mirrors to pull it off. Next to its sideshow, chastity and fidelity look like frumps (or "so very proper", as another poster said with sarcasm). But after all the playing, where are you? Alone...on the inside.
I have known some "sluts" (male and female) who later repented and were gloriously transformed by Christ. Christ take can such a woman and free her, making her new and giving her back dignity. The woman he spoke to at the well is a great example. She was a loose woman and yet He carried on a redeeming conversation with her...HER, not the "good folk" back in the town. He started with her and she went and told everyone about Jesus—"He told me everything I ever did."
I suppose it's better not to be the woman at the well in the first place, because life is just harder for an immoral person, especially in their inner person. But I'm happy that Jesus loves sinners of all stripes and can redeem even the "worst" of us.
You seem to say that with contempt.
That may be your belief, but the majority of Christian witness over the last 2000 years would find that comment appalling.
I am too. And of course, you're right. Any sinner can be redeemed by Christ. But what a shame that we hardly even recognize sin anymore, much less the way out through Christ. In terms of sexual morality, many of our young are falling off cliffs. I watch MTV and I see 17-year old girls on dating shows who feel they must turn over their bodies to men on the first or second date. They desparately want true love, but end up being sexual rags for promiscuous guys who never had the slightest intent of truly loving them. And then the guys just live for the moment, using desperate women as they will, but never finding the true happiness that can come from marriage and the life long commitment to one another.
Nobody vibrates with 'hatred' for public schools. It's just that a great many are coming to the realization that public schools are 1) not teaching our kids academics very well, on average, despite swallowing enormous amounts of money (far more than private schools do) and 2) there are powerful political and other agendas at work in public schools which seek to teach things to our kids that are diametrically opposed to the values that many hold dear. It's not hatred - just disgust. They are not the same. I don't hate anyone. I am disgusted by what I see in the public schools.
I didn't always agree with my parents on things, and I did often resent having restrictions placed on my freedom. But I knew that my parents loved me (and still do), and that anything they told me or restricted me to came from that deep love. I had the wisdom and smarts to listen to them very carefully. I knew that next to God, nobody cared for me more.
A follow of Mad Mo (piss be upon his head) is almost automatically corrupt and immoral in order to follow the garbage religion that psychopath established.
And, it leaves you along on the outside as well. Guys who have self-respect will not hook up with these women. And, the other guys will not stay with them. Love does not conquer all.
It's the reverse. Since the 60s and 70s and all the safe sex programs, we have far higher rates of STDs and abortions than ever before. When you tell a kid that, as you say, "Nothing is 100% safe but a hand job is safer than oral sex, oral sex is safer than intercourse, and intercourse with a condom is safer than unprotected intercourse," you are implicitly saying: Stay safe. Go out and give hand jobs and oral sex. All the articles mention that girls are giving oral sex so much because they've been taught that it's better and safer than intercourse. That is true. But it's ill-serving those girls.
Could you give us an age minimum for transmission of STDs? I was just wondering how old these oldtimers have to be.
The point is: Teenagers will have sex. It is a fact. It is better that they do so with a condom and learn how to properly use one than to be told that sex is evil until you're married. Abstinence is chosen by many. As is the choice to engage in sexual relations before marriage. I respect each belief and do not value one over the other. If you irresponsibly engage in sex, then you're an idiot. That is your problem. But both sides should be taught.
We are basically turning our young teenage children into sexual animals, and away from committed, respectful, loving relationships. What a shame. Visited my son's Boy Scout camp for a day last year, and they had invited a very shapely teenage girl (about 17 years old) to work with the boys on their environmental badges. The whole camp suddenly took up an 'interest' in environmentalism. Several of the boys in our troop asked me how they could 'get somewhere' with this girl. I told them they should forget what they were thinking about and should start by respecting her and getting to know her. That thought had never occurred to them.
So, they are not sluts, after all. They are just doing it to make their husbands happy. And, you seem to think that a woman has to have all of this experience to make her husband feel like a man and happy in the bedroom. I don't know. I don't think that I have seen this line of reasoning before. It sounds like rationalization to me.
I was never taught that. In fact, I've been taught the opposite. That the risk of transmission of STD's exists in both activities and you must be prepared to take that risk and be sure of the character and 'cleanliness' if you will, of the person with whom you plan to engage in any kind of sexual activity. There's being smart in having sex, then there's being stupid. You can make a choice...unfortunately, teenagers tend to make stupid choices. But they should be educated nonetheless by someone knowledgeable...be aware of abstinence, should they so choose to abstain from sex, but be aware as well of how to be as safe as possible when having sex.
I think that if a woman is having sex simply for practice, she is abusing her body. Sex implies intimacy and should at the least be shared with somebody who you care for, inside or outside of marriage. To simply practice, cheapens the experience (a friend of mine is basically doing that right now---"practicing", and i'm quite disappointed). Women, unlike many (young, in particular) males, attach emotion and themselves to sex. It is important that they realize that not being with somebody you care for cheapens the experience and is detrimental to many young women's well-being. But I would not preach abstinence to them any more than I would preach to them to be wise in choosing a partner.
Actually, over 50% of kids DO NOT HAVE SEX before the end of high school. Thus, clearly, a great many teenagers are able to control themselves - even in a culture that glorifies any and all sexual acts. For those teenagers that do have sex, and even when they use a condom (which is useless with regard to many viral STDs), they risk getting: herpes, AIDs, and human papillomavirus. Further, condoms break frequently (10-15% of the time), leading to unwanted pregnancies and bacterial STDs, many of which no longer respond to antibiotics. A kid who's been taught that wearing a condom constitutes safe sex thus only needs to have sex about 7 times, on average, before he discovers that he's been lied to. By then, it's often too late. JediGirl - I don't know if you're a mom, or if you'll be one some day. When you are, go ahead and tell your kids that you expect that they will have sex, and that they should wear condoms. When your son or daughter daughter gets herpes (untreatable), or when your daughter gets pregnant and the boy disappears and you start to think about abortion (killing your grandhild), maybe you'll see things in a different light.
DITTO! leave the kids alone! If you tell them NOT to do it they will do it even more!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.