Posted on 01/05/2006 6:54:35 AM PST by Millee
Most sexually active teenage girls know relatively little about sexually transmitted diseases until it is too late, according to new research.
In a survey of 300 adolescent girls in the Pittsburgh area, Carnegie Mellon University researchers found that girls who reported having been diagnosed with an STD knew more about that particular disease than other girls, but did not know more about the other diseases.
The findings are published in the January edition of the Journal of Adolescent Health.
On average, with the exception of HIV/AIDS, the teens did not know many basic facts about STDs, said Julie Downs, lead author of the study.
"Our schools have decided to focus on AIDS, and that has come at a cost," she said. "Teens just aren't being taught about these other diseases, and so they may come away with a false sense of confidence."
The study's findings are troubling because teenagers who know little about STDs are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior and to delay the treatment of STDs, the researchers said.
And the consequences can be severe. Genital herpes, for example, cannot be cured. Genital warts can render a woman more susceptible to cervical cancer, and chlamydia can lead to infertility.
"The pill doesn't prevent STDs. Maybe you need a sex ed refresher course."
The Pill does prevent pregnancy, though. I didn't address that in my first response to you. And there's no doubt that women were sexually 'liberated' by not having to worry about getting pregnant.
I know some people don't read the articles, but did you even actually read the headline?
The point is that we are not educating the kids.
Apparently in your case the schools also failed to teach reading comprehension.
He didn't say the unwed pregnancy rate, he said the teen pregnancy rate is lower than it was in the 1950's.
It's a mirror image on violence, mostly. They view violence on TV as repulsive as Brent Bozell views curse words and suggestive content.
"My one daughter is 21, almost 22. No babies yet. My other daughter is 19 and believe it or not, no babies there either. My son is 19 (twins) and has yet to be served with child support papers. There is a simple way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STDs but you seem opposed. I wonder why."
Are all 4 children confirmed virgins?
"One of my friends taught sex ed to teen mothers."
I see. She was trying to close the barn door after the cows had gotten out and into the clover. Ah, well...
The pill wasn't the first birth control device. Women used birth control before the advent of the pill.
Sex education has absolutely nothing to do with our teenage birth rate.
Today it is acceptable, even encouraged( on a peer basis) to get pregnant and 'show your boyfriend how much you love him'.
Society willingly picks up the tab.
Heck, a neighbor, in a middle-class, educated neighborhood celebrated their daughter's illegitimate child. Balloons on the mailbox and all.
She did marry the father and they are not on welfare.
Until we can change the way of thinking of these parts of society it will never change. In other words, not in our lifetimes.
"I can't believe what I'm seeing on this thread. Those of you that think comprehensive sex-ed is taught in most public schools are flat-out wrong. I teach in an inner-city public school that has many teen pregnancies. The ONLY sex-ed the students at this school recieve is in a basic health class. And, that is based upon an ABSTINANCE-ONLY program.
In fact, teachers of this class are not even allowed to talk about contraception. While Hannity and Rush and other rabble-rousers love to point out some isolated instances where kids were taught to use condoms by putting them on banannas, that is not the norm. Only 2% of America's high shools dispense condoms. While we may like to extrapolate, let's keep the facts straight from the rhetoric.
To close our eyes and hope that kids know the "real" info about STD's and sex-ed is clearly not working. Provide kids with ALL of the facts--both that abstinace is the only way to prevent all STD's AND that if you are going to engage in sex (which about 50% of our high schoolers do) there are ways to reduce your risks, or don't expect these current STD trends to be reversed.
It's clear that abstinance-only programs don't work. Why would we keep throwing money at an approach that shows absolutely no tangible results? Come on, let's live in a reality-based world. Some kids are going to have sex. What should we do with those kids?"
Just want this to be repeated.
Unwed mothers are for the majority teens.
"Almost every public school policy is to teach kids to use condoms and accept promiscuous behavior. Almost no schools teach abstinance only, save for a few in the boon docks, where STD epidemics are not happening. Quite the opposite."
That's patently false, except the part about the lack of STD epidemics in the boondocks.
For thousands of years, teens were expected to have intercourse.
Three children - two plus one. And I don't know but I do know it isn't any of your business.
"He didn't say the unwed pregnancy rate, he said the teen pregnancy rate is lower than it was in the 1950's."
Yup. It is lower than it was. The pregnant teen girl got married, as often as not, back then.
I mean it is appropriate since many studies show kids having sex at age 8 and 9.
"I think any school with a health clinic will gladly hand out condoms. I would be interested to know of those that refuse."
Just about 100% of them, unless there's parental consent. Fear of Christian lawsuits drives this, I think.
I doubt seriously anyone actually believes that in 2006 but odds are that belief is somewhat true. The chances of "catching" during a single event are small. Very few people get pregnant just having sex one time. They are usually having sex and WHOOPS. Law of averages catches up.
Nope, it's all about AIDS and condoms. Everyone forgets that the condom is a birth control devise, and despite what it says on the dispensers, not really an effective means of disease control. It is a more a talisman. You keep it in your wallet and it wards off evil spirits.
No histerics here. Don't know what you are talking about.
IMO, the one where the second you knock up little Suzy you graduate to Working Man status.
Saw that with my own eyes when a cousin knocked up his girlfriend. Both 15 at the time and both immediately called up to “adult” working man/woman status the day it was found out. Were married within a couple of weeks too.
I remember spending summer vacation with his brother and while we were sleeping in until 7:30 or 8:00 his brother was rolling out of the rack at 4:30am because he had to be at the worksite by 5:30 so they could get busy laying shingles as soon as it got light enough to see.
His wife also worked swing shift sewing at a shirt factory while her mom watched the kid.
I can remember all that quite clearly and also clearly remember thinking “no thanks.”
His parents were of the opinion that “adults” don’t go to high school or enjoy summer vacations cooling their heels. Adults go to work. Adults have their own garage apartment they’re renting down the street. You want to engage in adult activities you better be prepared to go all in.
Her parents believed the same and they got a crash course in adulthood.
Anyway, that was the one and only case of that I can recall (among my relatives). I had many cousins and two siblings and none of them opted to follow in his footsteps.
It wasn’t all bad though. They were married 47 or 48 years. Ended up with five kids and nine grandkids and two great-grandkids before he died at 63-ish of leukemia.
Can also recall my dad referring to it from time to time. He’d say, “if you ever knock up (whoever) I’ll be glad to help you out – as soon as I get done reading the newspaper I’ll let you have the want ads so you can hunt up a job.”
I doubt that’s considered cutting-edge sex education but apparently something worked. Also remember overhearing an uncle commenting that now that he had a job, a place to stay, and a family to support, he could go ahead and have all the sex he wanted. Maybe he did but it was at least five years before she was pregnant again. I personally suspect Mr. Working Man was a little gun-shy and wanted to be better positioned financially before he did that again… but who knows.
Oh – also note that there wasn’t any single-parent family or welfare involved.
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.