Bristol Palin Interview on Fox News

[JulieN]

Ok, I just saw the interview.

Bristol can at least speak English.

Mrs. Palin butchers our common language.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 2/19/2009 8:47:47 AM
Author: AllieGator
KSinger, I love everything you say! I''m with you...I''m rather young (20), and I''ve been abstinent so far. I don''t see sex before marriage as wrong, I just think at this point the risks outweigh the benefits. My parents, however, taught me everything about condoms and other forms of birth control. My best friend, on the other hand, had a parent who said ''No sex. We won''t teach you any birth control, because it is wrong'', and she''s the one of us that has a 2 year old kid.

Am I conservative? Heck no! I''m one of the most liberal people in my group of friends. I''m pro-choice, pro-sex ed. All I''m trying to say is that there are still those of us out there who make the decisions based on what we believe--not what we are told by our parents. And that''s one of the reasons I believe comprehensive sex education is so important.

PS, KSinger...I just read the book you have quoted in your signature. A great read!

More than teaching you about BC, your parents apparently taught you some pretty serious critical thinking skills. It''s called enlightened self-interest, or a good ability to think past the end of your nose. But then I''ve always been a fan of reasoning rather than dogma as justification of my actions. I bet you are too.

And yes, it is a great book and author yes? She''s written a whole bunch of other stuff (most of which I haven''t gotten to yet). "Practicing History" is a good one too. I need to finish it though. I related that you had read Tuchman, to my husband last night. It elicited a laugh of pure joy. He''s a highschool history teacher, and occasionally gives the entire Vietnam section as additional reading, to his AP American History classes.

 

[JSM]

Date: 2/19/2009 11:37:16 PM
Author: Definitely, Maybe

Date: 2/19/2009 3:56:59 PM


I ditto almost everything you said JSM.


I don't think it matters what you teach your child they are going to be making their own decisions. I am 22 and can look at several different people I knew growing up and what they were taught. It didn't matter if they knew about BC, were told not to have sex, condoms you name it. It was and still is all in their decision and theirs only. I think it also comes down to each persons level of maturity. Even if told to use a method of BC and to let their parents know, how many actually do? I can name a lot of people I knew in HS who were too afraid to tell their parents they needed some form of BC.


Also, I haven't watched or seen much of Bristols interviews, but have they even said if they used any form of BC? Just because you use it doesn't guarantee you won't have a child. Sure you are less likely, but it can still happen.


I love that she has such a supportive family and enviroment to be raising her baby. Sure it isn't the most ideal situation at 17, but she will still be able to grow into herself and maybe even into a better person because of it.

Thanks for the shoutout! And I'm pretty sure Bristol didn't want to go into the BC questions - I'm not sure why she chose to avoid them, but I'm sure that no matter what she said on the subject, she'd be crucified for it by someone!

It definitely has to do with maturity, I agree. And you can definitely instill good decision making in some kids. Some, no matter what you do, will ignore you and do their own thing. That's the annoying thing about children - they have their own brains!

 

[sklingem]

Date: 2/18/2009 10:32:22 PM
Author: beebrisk
My parents and grandparents grew up in an era when it was the norm to teach that sex before marriage is ''wrong...period''.
Needless to say, most 17 years olds didn''t get pregnant then.

Uh ... no. Here are the facts:

http://www.faqs.org/childhood/So-Th/Teen-Pregnancy.html

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/20/2009 6:51:03 PM
Author: rob09

Date: 2/18/2009 10:32:22 PM

Author: beebrisk

My parents and grandparents grew up in an era when it was the norm to teach that sex before marriage is ''wrong...period''.

Needless to say, most 17 years olds didn''t get pregnant then.

Uh ... no. Here are the facts:


http://www.faqs.org/childhood/So-Th/Teen-Pregnancy.html

"Facts"? Debatable.

And if the teen pregnancy rate is on par with that of 1920, that might actually be correct. Except in 1920 it was not uncommon for 17 year olds to be married. And in 1920 tax payer dollars didn''t go to taking care of them.

But, if you think high school girls getting pregnant is cool...well, ok for you.

 

[sklingem]

Date: 2/20/2009 7:04:15 PM
Author: beebrisk

Date: 2/20/2009 6:51:03 PM

Author: rob09
''Facts''? Debatable.

And if the teen pregnancy rate is on par with that of 1920, that might actually be correct. Except in 1920 it was not uncommon for 17 year olds to be married. And in 1920 tax payer dollars didn''t go to taking care of them.

But, if you think high school girls getting pregnant is cool...well, ok for you.

What is debatable about the numbers??? Now you are bringing up marriage - and yes you are pry correct that more girls were married at that time. Which made it more socially acceptable to have children at that time. Not sure whether you also think that having a child at 17 when you are married is still not the best with respect to developmental status at that age (physical and emotional) and financial status compared to women who have kids at older ages. Or perhaps marriage solves all problems??? Hm ...
And no, I do not think that teenage pregnancy is good. Not sure where you got that from, although I suspect that it is one of the many insinuations with respect to my character that you have brought up across different threads.
No surprise here.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/20/2009 7:16:42 PM
Author: rob09

Date: 2/20/2009 7:04:15 PM

Author: beebrisk

Date: 2/20/2009 6:51:03 PM


Author: rob09

''Facts''? Debatable.


And if the teen pregnancy rate is on par with that of 1920, that might actually be correct. Except in 1920 it was not uncommon for 17 year olds to be married. And in 1920 tax payer dollars didn''t go to taking care of them.


But, if you think high school girls getting pregnant is cool...well, ok for you.

What is debatable about the numbers??? Now you are bringing up marriage - and yes you are pry correct that more girls were married at that time. Which made it more socially acceptable to have children at that time. Not sure whether you also think that having a child at 17 when you are married is still not the best with respect to developmental status at that age (physical and emotional) and financial status compared to women who have kids at older ages. Or perhaps marriage solves all problems??? Hm ...

And no, I do not think that teenage pregnancy is good. Not sure where you got that from, although I suspect that it is one of the many insinuations with respect to my character that you have brought up across different threads.

No surprise here.

Nope. Don''t feel that marriage solves everything, but feel very strongly that marriage is the best way to bring a child into the world...for the child. And do I think it''s a good thing for a 17 year old to be married with a child? Nope. But it''s preferable to unmarried, 17 year old mommies with slacker fathers, or no fathers for that matter. And most of all, I don''t want to support them as I watch everything in the culture, on TV, in the music, promoting and condoning the lifestyle.


And what? Calling you liberal impugns your character??

 

[HollyS]

Someone said here that ''children'' need to be taught about all their options.

Children should have no options. Not for BC, not for abortion, not for getting into situations that will lead to the need for either. Teenagers will always have hormones. When I was one, most girls did not get pregnant because they did not go ''all the way''. And yes, that''s the way we referred to sex. Thirty years later, it is common for the average 15 year old to not only have had a great deal of experience in what l-e-a-d-s to baby-making, they''ve been there, done that, more than once. Who''s to blame?

It should, from everyone''s point of view -- no matter your politics, no matter your religion, no matter your social status --it should be absolutely NOT OKAY that children are having children. That children are having abortions. That most teenagers have experience by a tender age. The right to use, know about, and be taught about contraception is a ridiculous argument. If they know about sex, they know about contraception. The point is not education. The point is what is acceptable in our culture. And unless you intend to stop allowing children to wear adult clothing, speak adult language, hear adult music, see adult movies or tv, use the internet without limits -- you will not change a darm thing when it comes to kids having kids. Children are exposed to way too much, way too early; and it is not okay.

Showing them how to put a condom on a banana won''t stop teen pregnancy. The statistics don''t lie.

Abstinence programs won''t work if no one has the -- pardon me -- balls to keep it zipped.

Teen sex should not be condoned, expected, or given the thumbs up. Unless you just don''t give a hoot. Then, whatever.

 

[sklingem]

Date: 2/20/2009 7:36:57 PM
Author: beebrisk

And what? Calling you liberal impugns your character??

No. Baseless insinuation that I find teenage pregnancy cool is. But I guess that that is better than suggesting that I am racist and/or antisemitic.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/20/2009 7:43:17 PM
Author: HollyS
Someone said here that 'children' need to be taught about all their options.


Children should have no options. Not for BC, not for abortion, not for getting into situations that will lead to the need for either. Teenagers will always have hormones. When I was one, most girls did not get pregnant because they did not go 'all the way'. And yes, that's the way we referred to sex. Thirty years later, it is common for the average 15 year old to not only have had a great deal of experience in what l-e-a-d-s to baby-making, they've been there, done that, more than once. Who's to blame?


It should, from everyone's point of view -- no matter your politics, no matter your religion, no matter your social status --it should be absolutely NOT OKAY that children are having children. That children are having abortions. That most teenagers have experience by a tender age. The right to use, know about, and be taught about contraception is a ridiculous argument. If they know about sex, they know about contraception. The point is not education. The point is what is acceptable in our culture. And unless you intend to stop allowing children to wear adult clothing, speak adult language, hear adult music, see adult movies or tv, use the internet without limits -- you will not change a darm thing when it comes to kids having kids. Children are exposed to way too much, way too early; and it is not okay.


Showing them how to put a condom on a banana won't stop teen pregnancy. The statistics don't lie.


Abstinence programs won't work if no one has the -- pardon me -- balls to keep it zipped.


Teen sex should not be condoned, expected, or given the thumbs up. Unless you just don't give a hoot. Then, whatever.

Couldn't have said it better.

It seems the consensus around here is "Well, kids are gonna have sex, soooo..."

What a sad, defeatist attitude.

Keeping kids away from the sleaze (Brittney Spear's "If U Seek Amy", anyone?) as much as possible (admittedly an uphill battle) and making them understand that teen sex often leads to pregnancy or disease at worst, and unthinkable heartbreak at best, might actually drive home the point. But parents have to be vigilant, and yes, they have to say "NO".

When it comes to protecting a kid's health and happiness (physical, mental and spiritual), it is the parents responsibility to limit "choices".

Holly, I think I'm close to your age and OY! the world has strayed soooo far...so fast.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/20/2009 7:52:00 PM
Author: rob09

Date: 2/20/2009 7:36:57 PM

Author: beebrisk


And what? Calling you liberal impugns your character??

No. Baseless insinuation that I find teenage pregnancy cool is. But I guess that that is better than suggesting that I am racist and/or antisemitic.

.
I just call 'em as I see 'em. Your response was offensive, racist and anti-Semitic. That was no insinuation. That was observation. The end.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 2/20/2009 7:43:17 PM
Author: HollyS
Someone said here that ''children'' need to be taught about all their options.

Children should have no options. Not for BC, not for abortion, not for getting into situations that will lead to the need for either. Teenagers will always have hormones. When I was one, most girls did not get pregnant because they did not go ''all the way''. And yes, that''s the way we referred to sex. Thirty years later, it is common for the average 15 year old to not only have had a great deal of experience in what l-e-a-d-s to baby-making, they''ve been there, done that, more than once. Who''s to blame?

It should, from everyone''s point of view -- no matter your politics, no matter your religion, no matter your social status --it should be absolutely NOT OKAY that children are having children. That children are having abortions. That most teenagers have experience by a tender age. The right to use, know about, and be taught about contraception is a ridiculous argument. If they know about sex, they know about contraception. The point is not education. The point is what is acceptable in our culture. And unless you intend to stop allowing children to wear adult clothing, speak adult language, hear adult music, see adult movies or tv, use the internet without limits -- you will not change a darm thing when it comes to kids having kids. Children are exposed to way too much, way too early; and it is not okay.

Showing them how to put a condom on a banana won''t stop teen pregnancy. The statistics don''t lie.

Abstinence programs won''t work if no one has the -- pardon me -- balls to keep it zipped.

Teen sex should not be condoned, expected, or given the thumbs up. Unless you just don''t give a hoot. Then, whatever.

Excellent, Holly. Thank you.

 

[zhuzhu]

Sure it is nice to dream about living in an ideal world. However we all know that no world is ever ideal. It is obviously choice of yours how you want to teach and bring up your OWN children.

However I do not think anyone (including "libs") is saying that we should encourage teen sex. The discussion is on the most effective strategy to HELP children in today''s world to best protect themselves from unexpected pregnancy and STDs. That, is what education is for.

 

[E B]

Again, keeping our teenagers in a bubble may be a good plan in theory, but it just isn't realistic. And sure, we can all point fingers at who's to blame, but the finger pointing does VERY little to prevent teen pregnancy, which is what we're discussing, no?

As a parent, one may be able to censor his or her teen's world while the teen is at home, but once they're among their peers, the rules change. It becomes less about what a parent wants for that child and more about what their peers are doing. Teenagers from all kinds of families, good and bad, will have sex- Bristol Palin is a perfect example. And until you can parent each and every one of your teen's peers, it's going to continue to happen. Is it ideal? No. But it's reality.

If you try to scare a teenager out of having sex before marriage without creating a comfortable environment in which they can discuss options with you if they choose to have sex, what does it accomplish? Spur-of-the-moment, pressured, guilty, UNPROTECTED sex. Which leads to children having children.

The point of this debate isn't revealing who's to blame, it's how to prevent. Teenagers are going to have sex. Now, how do we make sure if they choose to, they do it safely? THAT'S the issue, here.

 

[packrat]

Date: 2/19/2009 8:30:07 AM
Author: ksinger

Date: 2/18/2009 10:12:19 PM

Author: EBree

The first minute or so of the interview was so awkward, I had to turn it off. How much is she going to reveal about her decisions leading up to her unplanned pregnancy?

Date: 2/18/2009 9:58:41 PM

Author: beebrisk


Is there a 17 year old on the planet who doesn''t know about condoms??? C''mon.


Young lust and carelessness get lots of kids in trouble, but NOT because they weren''t ''taught'' about birth control. And while abstinence might be ''unrealistic'', an abstinent teen will never find her/himself in this position.

The point is that abstinence-only education is useless as, to use your words, young lust and carelessness get lots of kids in trouble. When you teach a child that sex before marriage is wrong (period!), if they get caught up in a ''hot and heavy'' situation, they''re less likely to be prepared. Simply knowing about condoms or other types of birth control obviously isn''t enough.

If they get caught up in that situation, well, they can claim heat of the moment, mistake, (maybe a doozy, but still) and yet walk away with their indoctrination (I believe sex before marriage is wrong, period!) intact. On the other hand, if they PLAN for it by having a condom handy, well, that means they thought it through and came to a different conclusion than what was told them by their parents and their religion. Oh the cognitive and self-image dissonance THAT sets up. Talk about mental rebellion. Better to just not think about it too much, yes?


I find it interesting that her need to remain in denial was probably greater than her devotion to not shaming her parents. THAT one certainly kept me out of trouble. The thought of my mother''s disappointment in me was such a huge deterrent. I just couldn''t take the risk. And ironically, my mom never browbeat me with how wrong sex was. So I didn''t think sex before marriage (as a teen) was ''wrong'', just dangerous for me and those I loved. I pretty much knew I was too young, and that I couldn''t burden another with the possible consequences of my choice. But I suspect that isn''t the mindset of the average teen...I think we can safely say it wasn''t going through the mind of Bristol Palin.

Dangit-I don''t know how to highlight, but I wanted to agree w/ksinger''s last paragraph. I was brought up in a religion that absolutely FORBIDS pre marital sex, and obviously my parents didn''t want me to engage in "extra curricular activities". But, it was ultimately my decision, and I did it. I went to the Dr to get on birth control-and booooy was my mom mad-but I was trying to take care of myself. I knew it wasn''t 100% effective, so I thought a little extra barrier couldn''t hurt, and almost always used condoms as well. Even after I got married-we used both forms of BC until we were ready to start trying to have a baby.

I don''t agree w/abstinence only teachings. But I don''t have a solution either. I work at a family practice Dr''s office and we have a lot of pregnant teenagers-which is scary since we only have 5000 people in this town. We have had a couple 14 year olds pregnant. I don''t think kids fully understand what it means to have a baby and to be a parent. I don''t know how they CAN know when things are so different for THEM when they have a child so young-sometimes I feel it''s like a fun party..have a baby shower and get some presents..people ohh and ahh over the baby..Get free medical care, free child care, you can go on to college for free or cheaper, high schools in some places have day care.

I know people were getting married younger and having families younger "back in the day"..but everything was different. If you took boys and girls ages 14-18 today and stuck them in the Way Back Machine and they spent some time in the world 80 or 100 years ago-would they be able to make it, living the way they did then? I doubt it. Expectations were higher back then, even for really young kids. We have a society of victims and laziness and entitlement. People need to learn to do for themselves. But, they won''t if every time something happens, everyone is so quick to rush to their aid and downplay it. Shaking your head and saying "boys will be boys" or "well these things happen" doesn''t seem to work.

Sorry, that was long and rambly, and again, I have no solution, just my opinion.

 

[Skippy123]

I thought Bristol Palin did great; I was disappointed that this interview turned into a Sarah Palin interview. Even the interviewer said, wasn''t the other MIL suppose to come in and Sarah made some excuse. Oh well. It was interesting to watch and her son is just adorable!

 

[E B]

Date: 2/20/2009 8:18:44 PM
Author: zhuzhu

However I do not think anyone (including ''libs'') is saying that we should encourage teen sex. The discussion is on the most effective strategy to HELP children in today''s world to best protect themselves from unexpected pregnancy and STDs. That, is what education is for.

Exactly. The question here is "how do we prevent teens from getting pregnant?" An abstinence-only advocate''s answer? Prevent teens from having sex. A swell answer, but abstinence-only education isn''t preventing teen sex. In the meantime, as teenagers continue to have sex, how do we keep them from having unprotected sex?

 

[HollyS]

Date: 2/20/2009 8:18:44 PM
Author: zhuzhu
Sure it is nice to dream about living in an ideal world. However we all know that no world is ever ideal. It is obviously choice of yours how you want to teach and bring up your OWN children.

However I do not think anyone (including ''libs'') is saying that we should encourage teen sex. The discussion is on the most effective strategy to HELP children in today''s world to best protect themselves from unexpected pregnancy and STDs. That, is what education is for.

The point is not you vs. me, us vs. them, what should be taught or not taught. The point is we should not have to HELP CHILDREN protect themselves from pregnancy and STDs. Parents, educators, society at large should make it difficult, if not close to impossible, for CHILDREN to be in situations where they have to 1) make a choice, 2) use protection, 3) remember everything anyone has ever said about ''what they need to know''.

There never was an ideal world. But people used to have the strength of character to say it''s not okay to do whatever you feel like doing, at the moment you feel like doing it. THAT is the real issue. Ms. Palin looking the other way when her daughter was unchaperoned -- trusting that Bristol would make the right choice because she''d been taught -- proves the point that children in today''s world will not make the right choice. It has to be made for them. And the only way to do it is to make it socially unacceptable, once again, to be sexually active at a young age.

Nothing else is going to work.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/20/2009 9:26:55 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 2/20/2009 8:18:44 PM

Author: zhuzhu

Sure it is nice to dream about living in an ideal world. However we all know that no world is ever ideal. It is obviously choice of yours how you want to teach and bring up your OWN children.


However I do not think anyone (including ''libs'') is saying that we should encourage teen sex. The discussion is on the most effective strategy to HELP children in today''s world to best protect themselves from unexpected pregnancy and STDs. That, is what education is for.

The point is not you vs. me, us vs. them, what should be taught or not taught. The point is we should not have to HELP CHILDREN protect themselves from pregnancy and STDs. Parents, educators, society at large should make it difficult, if not close to impossible, for CHILDREN to be in situations where they have to 1) make a choice, 2) use protection, 3) remember everything anyone has ever said about ''what they need to know''.


There never was an ideal world. But people used to have the strength of character to say it''s not okay to do whatever you feel like doing, at the moment you feel like doing it. THAT is the real issue. Ms. Palin looking the other way when her daughter was unchaperoned -- trusting that Bristol would make the right choice because she''d been taught -- proves the point that children in today''s world will not make the right choice. It has to be made for them. And the only way to do it is to make it socially unacceptable, once again, to be sexually active at a young age.


Nothing else is going to work.

That''s it. That IS IT.

 

[zhuzhu]

Date: 2/20/2009 9:26:55 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 2/20/2009 8:18:44 PM

...... The point is we should not have to HELP CHILDREN protect themselves from pregnancy and STDs. Parents, educators, society at large should make it difficult, if not close to impossible, for CHILDREN to be in situations where they have to 1) make a choice, 2) use protection, 3) remember everything anyone has ever said about ''what they need to know''.

Nothing else is going to work.

Point well taken. I would be interested to hear what strategy you think we should apply to achieve that goal.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Ok, I have to respond to several points

1) It is legal for a teenager to have sex in CA, if there is a 3 year age difference between the couple, it is legal even if one is over 18. It is legal for a teenager to seek birth control without a parents consent, and it is legal for the provider to give it to them without talking to their parents. That is because the state does not want more people on welfare and realize that teens are afraid of their parents for the reasons above (some of the comments made).

2) The reason why people married so young for centuries before birth control because they realized that hormones are really hard to control. The women were married young because if they were pregnant, it showed to the world. Men married older, and sex before marriage often did not apply. In fact during the hight of the Catholic era, prostitution was legal because men had to head the "call of nature." The standards we are setting are not compatible with our biological wiring.

3) New research is showing that the pre frontal cortex in teens is not as developed as we once thought. This is the part of your brain that leads to decision making and impulse control. Two very important skills to saying "no" to that guy who "loves you."

4) We cannot address delaying sex in adolescents until we address the fact that males are taught to push and push and that is ok. Look at how much more criticism Bristol is getting vs the boy, yes he is getting some, but who's name is on the subject line of this topic.

5) My goal is to keep teenagers healthy even if they make mistakes, I have the means to, why would I hold back? Of course the best thing is for them to wait, but if they tell they are not going to, or worse, they are already engaging in sexual activity, I will tell them their options. It is up to them if they want to listen. We can only do so much.

6) Children having no rights is what allowed child abuse to occur without being a crime (as before the 1960's children were viewed as property of their parents, and not individuals with rights), and child labor. Children are humans, and all humans deserve rights.

 

[E B]

Date: 2/20/2009 9:26:55 PM
Author: HollyS

Ms. Palin looking the other way when her daughter was unchaperoned -- trusting that Bristol would make the right choice because she'd been taught -- proves the point that children in today's world will not make the right choice. It has to be made for them. And the only way to do it is to make it socially unacceptable, once again, to be sexually active at a young age.

Nothing else is going to work.

Short of a) society banding together to make enormous cultural changes and b) on a more individual level, locking a child in his or her room until he or she is old enough to have sex, how do you propose we achieve these goals? Not trying to be snarky, I'm genuinely curious.

ETA: Oops! zhuzhu beat me to it.

 

[zhuzhu]

LtlFirecracker, very well said. Thank you.

I was also wondering, those who are deeply against teen having sex or exposing them to anything that will trigger "thoughts of sex", how do you fight against nature? To "fight away" nature urges, masturbation is the safest way as it relieves sexual frustration and does not result in STD/pregnancy. How do you feel about teaching that to hormone-driven teenage boys so they do not approach your daughters in the way that you do not approve of?

 

[HollyS]

Date: 2/20/2009 9:50:52 PM
Author: zhuzhu

Date: 2/20/2009 9:26:55 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 2/20/2009 8:18:44 PM

...... The point is we should not have to HELP CHILDREN protect themselves from pregnancy and STDs. Parents, educators, society at large should make it difficult, if not close to impossible, for CHILDREN to be in situations where they have to 1) make a choice, 2) use protection, 3) remember everything anyone has ever said about ''what they need to know''.

Nothing else is going to work.

Point well taken. I would be interested to hear what strategy you think we should apply to achieve that goal.

Have I been, at all, vague?

Parents should parent. That will probably mean giving the lectures kids used to hear 30, 40, 50 years ago. "You will not; period." Kids and their hormones aren''t just a 21st century phenomenon, you know.

Health class should teach exactly which activity creates which result, the how and the why. But condoning sexual activity, or ''expecting'' sexual experimentation, or standing on the sidelines saying "It''s legal for you to do it, I can''t stop you, so won''t you please use a condom" is simply not working.

Society must change, parental responsibility must get ''tougher'', and we all need to stop scratching our heads and tsking at the result of our pandering to the lowest common denominator, and get real.

 

[E B]

Date: 2/20/2009 10:06:57 PM
Author: HollyS

Parents should parent. That will probably mean giving the lectures kids used to hear 30, 40, 50 years ago. 'You will not; period.' Kids and their hormones aren't just a 21st century phenomenon, you know.

If this works, wonderful! Unfortunately, it doesn't always. I can't imagine Sarah Palin offered Bristol a choice of colored condoms before she decided to get frisky with her winner of a fiance. Mama Palin likely said 'you will not; period' and Bristol, like many teenagers, probably tuned her out.

Date: 2/20/2009 10:06:57 PM
Author: HollyS

Health class should teach exactly which activity creates which result, the how and the why. But condoning sexual activity, or 'expecting' sexual experimentation, or standing on the sidelines saying 'It's legal for you to do it, I can't stop you, so won't you please use a condom' is simply not working.

Neither is the alternative- statistics don't lie. For a bit of anecdotal evidence: I was a Catholic school girl among many others who was taught to be abstinent. Only. Very few of my peers took it seriously. If we weren't having sex (and I wasn't), it wasn't because we were told not to.

Date: 2/20/2009 10:06:57 PM
Author: HollyS

Society must change, parental responsibility must get 'tougher', and we all need to stop scratching our heads and tsking at the result of our pandering to the lowest common denominator, and get real.

A group effort of this magnitude won't be happening anytime soon. We've got to figure out how to deal with it NOW.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

We have one of the highest teen pregnancy of developed countries and it is not because other countries have managed to get their teens to wait, it is because they have better sex education, and easier access to birth control.

One of the biggest reasons for infertility is Chylamdia. If a girl is telling me she is having sex, am I going to tell her that is wrong and give her no alternatives? Or would I rather give her a place to come to get condoms and regular testing so that she can be treated early if necessary (as there are usually no symptoms). Ask any women who cannot get pregnant and going through infertility treatments how emotionally painful that is, I would never wish that on anyone.

We don't tell our diabetics, hey you are not eating well, so I am going to withhold medications because I don't like the decisions you are making. I am not going to say, "hey you have diabetes, either diet, exercise, or get diabetes and all the complications." We do the best we can to treat them despite the choices they make. In my mind, this is no different. Withholding options and access to treatment because I don't like someone's decisions is not the right thing to do, kind of goes against the who "do no harm" promise I made.

 

[E B]

Date: 2/20/2009 10:19:55 PM
Author: LtlFirecracker
We have one of the highest teen pregnancy of developed countries and it is not because other countries have managed to get their teens to wait, it is because they have better sex education, and easier access to birth control.

That makes sense, Ltl.

I''ve got to grab dinner, but a quick Google search produced this. Some may find it interesting.

Eighty-six percent of the recent decline in U.S. teen pregnancy rates is the result of improved contraceptive use, while a small proportion of the decline (14%) can be attributed to teens waiting longer to start having sex, according to “Explaining Recent Declines in Adolescent Pregnancy in the United States: The Contribution of Abstinence and Improved Contraceptive Use” by John Santelli et al., published in the January issue of the American Journal of Public Health.

Source

 

[packrat]

For #3 above, do we then say, well, your pre frontal cortex isn''t fully developed, so I understand it''s not your fault you can''t say no. Doesn''t that then take away that their actions are choices, and make them into something over which they have no control? And how far do we take that? Some boys (and men) absolutely will not take no for an answer..so do we tell a girl that the boys pre frontal cortex wasn''t fully developed so to cut him some slack? Ack, that sounds so totally snarky and snippy to me, and that''s not how I want it to sound at ALL. I don''t know how to word it to sound better.

Kids should have rights. Rights to make their own choices. But conversely, they should be able to deal w/the consequences of those choices. They want to be treated like adults but don''t want the same "crap" we have to deal w/as adults..it doesn''t work that way. I remember my parents saying "you want to be treated like an adult, fine, act like an adult." If you''re adult enough to have sex, then you should be adult enough to protect yourself and understand that nothing other than abstinence is 100% foolproof, so you best be prepared to step up to the plate like an adult if a pregnancy occurs. Hahaha, tho that''s kind of hard to ask for since a lot of ADULTS don''t act like adults.

 

[packrat]

Oh jeez, that looks so dumb..I should''ve quoted Ltl''s post..this is what happens when I start to type and get interrupted 900 times.

And I agree w/Ebree that we need to figure out how to handle it NOW. I do think there should be a lot of education about sex, and about what can happen and that you need to take control of the situation and protect yourself..but it doesn''t seem to me that either approach, (abstinence, or education) really seems to be working..in the end, the kids are choosing to have sex and choosing to not protect themselves.

 

[HollyS]

Ebree, you and your friends not taking ''it'' seriously is exactly what I''m talking about. The ingrained idea that you have the right to do whatever you please, never mind what you are being told, never mind what is expected of you. The whole "I''m an individual, I get to decide for myself, you can''t tell me what to do, if it feels good then I''m gonna." Does not, and should not, fly when you are a teenager. And that is the parent''s responsibility.

I can assure you, my mother would have brooked absolutely no attitude. And no deviation from her ''set in stone'' behavioral guidelines. All I can say is, it certainly kept her 3 daughters panties on during our ''formative'' years. I won''t elaborate on her methods, but they were effective. But then, it mattered to us if we disappointed our parents. I don''t think the average kid gives a flip today. And therein lies the real problem. If they don''t respect authority, and they don''t respect themselves enough to say no, you can''t keep them from harm.