Posted on 07/05/2005 2:25:26 AM PDT by gridlock
CHICAGO (AP) - A leading group of pediatricians says teenagers need access to birth control and emergency contraception, not the abstinence-only approach to sex education favored by religious groups and President Bush.
The recommendations are part of the American Academy of Pediatrics' updated teen pregnancy policy.
"Even though there is great enthusiasm in some circles for abstinence-only interventions, the evidence does not support abstinence-only interventions as the best way to keep young people from unintended pregnancy," said Dr. Jonathan Klein, chairman of the academy committee that wrote the new recommendations.
Teaching abstinence but not birth control makes it more likely that once teenagers initiate sexual activity they will have unsafe sex and contract sexually transmitted diseases, said Dr. S. Paige Hertweck, a pediatric obstetrician-gynecologist at the University of Louisville who provided advice for the report.
The report appears in July's Pediatrics, being published Tuesday.
It updates a 1998 policy by omitting the statement that "abstinence counseling is an important role for all pediatricians." The new policy says that while doctors should encourage adolescents to postpone sexual activity, they also should help ensure that all teens - not just those who are sexually active - have access to birth control, including emergency contraception.
Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said counseling only abstinence, preferably until marriage, is the best approach because it sends a clear, consistent message. Teenagers who are sexually active should have access to contraception, but making birth control available to teens who aren't sends a contradictory message, he said.
The academy's recommendations "to some extent confuse prevention and intervention," Horn said.
Citing 2003 government data, the academy's report says more than 45 percent of high school girls and 48 percent of boys have had sexual intercourse. While teen pregnancy rates have decreased in recent years, about 900,000 U.S. teens get pregnant each year.
Moreover, U.S. teen birth rates are higher than in comparable industrialized countries, which may be partly due to greater access to contraception in some countries, the report said.
The Medical Institute for Sexual Health, a nonprofit group that has worked on pro-abstinence programs with the Bush administration and faith-based groups, opposes the academy's policy shift.
"I don't think it's a smart move at all," said group founder Dr. Joe McIlhaney Jr., an obstetrician-gynecologist.
However, Karen Pearl, interim president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said the academy "is to be applauded ... for having medicine trump ideology."
HHS' Horn also said advising pediatricians to ensure that teens have access to emergency contraception is problematic for doctors and parents who morally object to the pills. He faulted the report for lacking guidance on what to do when pediatricians' moral views differ from their patients' parents.
Emergency contraception, sometimes called the morning-after pill, blocks ovulation or fertilization and can prevent pregnancy for up to three days after sex. Opponents consider it a form of abortion because it is thought to also help prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the womb, and some pharmacists have refused to sell it.
Emergency contraception was not mentioned in the old report because it was new and relatively untested, Klein said.
The academy supports making morning-after pills available without a prescription, Klein said.
Print this article out and bring it to your child's next pediatric check-up. If the American Academy of Pediatricians is going to take this approach, it is a discussion you need to have with your child's doctor.
Phooey on the AAP here:).
The new "non-threatening" phrase for abortion, emergency contraception.
This means the AAP is against parental notification for abortions.
Unfortunately, the kid really does have to go to the doctor from time to time. It would be a shame if this sort of attitude eroded the trust between pediatricians and parents.
Good point. Things like this can be worked out.
If the doctor objects to having this discussion, tell him/her to bring it up with the Union, because it is this policy statement on the part of the American Academy of Pediatricians that makes it necessary.
You're full of good points tonight. No gridlock for you.
You gotta wonder how many of those 900,000 pregnancies are accidental. A lot of "teens", which includes 18- and 19-year-olds, get pregnant on purpose. You can educate them perfectly and provide them with every voluntary birth control device known to medicine, and that will only make them more effective at becoming pregnant, if that is their desire.
A good point. Unfortunately, this is also poverty based. Most of those who get counseling are not the poor, and the poor are mostly one parent families and predominantly black. So you are fighting the example of the parent. They did it so why can't I?
19-year-olds having babies is not necessarily a bad thing. Fifty years ago, it was the norm.
This newer "abstract logic" in re Pediatric org falls right in line with the "everybody does it" mantra of the left.
I do think Wade Horn is right. Doctors used to be pretty good at assessing the "whole patient" and ordering tests as necessary: now, it's just run everyone through the tests...
And thereby reveals their child-sex agenda. If their real interest was children's health, they would not be promoting the unsupervised distribution of drugs with unknown long-term effect to children.
It's evil really. Birth control or "morning-after pills" do nothing to discourage the transmission of STDs. In fact, they make it easier for males to avoid using condoms (for what that's worth.) "Just go to the drugstore in the morning and get a pill, ho!"
Who cares if the girls have chlamydia or HPV by the time they're 12? I wonder if the AAP is colluding with the "assisted fertility" industry? Big buck being made off the "epidemic" of infertility.
The Nanny State favors one-size-fits-all solutions to all problems. It used to be people relied on their own native intellingence and perception. Nowadays, folks just follow the SOP from a book. So if kids in the inner cities are having sex at 12, farm girls in Montana have to get routine tests for STDs.
Each parent just wants what is best for his own child, and now has to fight the AAP with their top-down policy-making along with all the other problems out there.
Our hot-shot pediatrician (he appears on TV once in a while) was veeeeery skeptical of our homeschooling. "But what about the socialization, blah, blah, blah..."
My wife was very patient, listening with feigned attentivness while speaking only when asked a direct question. Name, rank and serial number. Lately though, (10 years later) he's been asking some intelligent questions. He's starting to come around, now that his grandkids have begun the "socialization" process.
Nowadays, folks just follow the SOP from a book. So if kids in the inner cities are having sex at 12, farm girls in Montana have to get routine tests for STDs.
This is the Universal Health Model and "way".
Back when I was young (and dinosaurs roamed the Earth...), people knew about STDs, but what you really feared was getting a girl pregnant. That was just an all-purpose, your-life-is-over, irredeemable screw up. But with universal access to all the different types of birth control, that problem can be mitigated.
Without the fear, teen sexual activity becomes much more prevalent. The unintended consequence is unintended teen pregnancy remains high. And now the AAP wants to take yet another step down that road.
He who pays the piper calls the tune. When the Doctor works for the Patient, he has the Patient's interests at heart. When the Doctor works for the State, it is not surprising when he serves the State's interests at the expense of the Patient.
It could be that they are the cause for some of the abortions. If I had a daughter they would not be alone with her.
It is sad to say, but the reason many pediatricians object to homeschooling is because they fear children will not be well cared for unless they are seen by teachers and people outside the family. It used to be pretty much universally accepted that parents had the best interests of their children at heart. Nowadays, under the Nanny State, children are presumed to rely on the state to protect them from their parents.
Socialization is just a code-word for observation.
My mother has just turned 21 when she had me.
I was born 7 months after my parents marriage -- and I was not premature. (I don't think I was "planned"
Fifty years ago, having children -- even "unplanned" children -- in marriage was the norm.
Is it still the norm -- especially for teens who have "unplanned" children?
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.