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.
"So why teach them about "Safe Sex"?"
So why teach them about Abstinence-only?
"The pill wasn't the first birth control device. Women used birth control before the advent of the pill."
Very few teenaged girls were fitted with diaphragms, mlcnnnn. If there was birth control being used by teenagers back then, it was condoms used by the boys. And condoms weren't all that easy to obtain, believe me.
Withdrawal has always been a lousy birth control method, and that's one that was often used before the pill. Teenaged boys aren't all that good at that technique.
"Whats more scary is your Margaret Sanger approach to eugenics.... Thats not really conservative.."
(I don't endorse it...I'm simply a realist. To me, it's the better choice than the below consequences)
It's more conservative than endorsing a policy that results in either:
1. Teenage pregancy ending in abortion
or
2. Teenage pregnancy that increases size of Welfare State.
"I think any school with a health clinic will gladly hand out condoms. I would be interested to know of those that refuse."
Very few high schools have health clinics. Most don't even have full-time nurses any longer. Very, very few high schools hand out condoms.
Colleges are another matter altogether. College students are legally adults, not children, so they make their own decisions, and are not the subject of this thread.
Not true: www.americanvalues.org/Teen.PDF
Now that is from 1999, but since then teen birth rates have fallen while unwed births have risen, so it is even more true today.
""Safe Sex" is teaching them how to have sex safely. Kinda like teaching how to blow up a building without getting hurt."
OK. Like so many other cases, Islam was a bad example. Apologies.
Still doesn't change my opinion here, though!
Respectfully,
Of course many of them did get married. Imagine that.
It was a government run program. I guess I didn't have to say that. The girls were generally 14-16 and they received benefits to come to the class. She showed them how to deploy a condom and signed them up for the Pill. By and large, they were dumb as a bag of hammers.
Sexually oppressed? The popular culture is full of messages to kids: if you are a virgin, you are a loser. Having lived in Germany for many years, I agree that the Germans are more laid back about nudity, but they are also much more rule bound. They don't have this mindless faith that "true-love" conquers all, that that hot babe is disease free. Brothels are regulated and the whores ARE inspected on a regular basis.
" I would think that would be a goal of America. Are you for this goal?"
Apparently, the abstinence-only crowd is in favor of higher teenager pregnancy rates, higher teenage abortion rates, and an increase in the Welfare state, since all are unfortunate-but-reality-based consequences of abstinence-only programs.
"It was a government run program. I guess I didn't have to say that. The girls were generally 14-16 and they received benefits to come to the class. She showed them how to deploy a condom and signed them up for the Pill. By and large, they were dumb as a bag of hammers."
You could have been not "very cute" and still gotten some action, if you were so inclined. Teenaged boys are not too picky when it comes to intercourse.
Maybe they shoud teach them that (1) condoms fail 15% of the time even when successfully deployed and (2) you have to take the pill as prescribed.
BTW, are you aware they this is nothing more than simple training in how to behave like a whore. Maybe they should be assigned a pimp to select their "dates" for them, someone to steer them away from losers. Oh, that's what parents are for?
"Yup you've bought into its all about Aids and Pregnancy... Not the literally dozens of sexually transmitted diseases, many of which are not prevented by barrier birth control!"
I haven't "bought into" anything, except that abstinence-only programs are failing to educate teenagers.
Your post is a good example that more than just "abstinence-only" needs to be taught. And more than just AIDS/pregnancy.
They learn early. My daughter is in 6th grade and they are already leaping into dating. Girls pursue the guys they want to date to gain "points" with the other girls. They separate into "girls that have dated" and "girls that haven't". The boys are basically just pawns in this whole thing.
The boys that are really into the whole dating scene are gay as May Poles.
"Three children - two plus one. And I don't know but I do know it isn't any of your business."
I agree it isn't my business, but if they aren't virgins, then they're using safe sex!!!
"You keep it in your wallet and it wards off evil spirits."
It's the ring-shaped mark it leaves that wards off evil spirits!
60% of first babies in Sweden are born to unmarried moms.
The only thing that I don't understand is that most conservatives can't stand Europe (government) and what it stands for. Now when it is convenient there are some (one in particular) who all of a sudden are pro-Europe. I think we as Americans need to work on our own problems because if we look outside of our borders then what are we going to do with our next problem? Look to Europe?
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.