All of these points were made in the comments of the first thread. Take the sex out of it and it's still a huge problem. Throw the sex in and they get to blame the opposition on the prudes and religious nuts. It's a bad idea, no matter what drugs they're giving the kids.

Schools should stick to teaching academics. Period. (for those who went to schools where diversity was emphasized over grammar and arithmetic, that's the little dot at the end of a sentence)

Reply

Schools should worry about *educating*, and not medical care. There are plenty of avenues for underprivileged students to get medical care - free clinics, county health departments, etc. if their parents take the initiative to find out where those facilities are. The school can make that information available to students' parents, if they want to help, but they have no business doing medical things to students, aside from having a school nurse who can dispense medication that was prescribed by a doctor, and determine whether or not a kid is sick enough to be sent home.

In order for the pill to be effective, you have to take it at the same time every day. Middle schoolers aren't that reliable. It's only going to give them a false sense of security, and perhaps also cause them to not use condoms. The pill doesn't prevent against disease.

I'll tell you what, it's one thing if my kids go to Planned Parenthood without my knowledge and get the pill - that shows enough initiative that they probably truly need it and will be taught to use it appropriately. If I ever found out that they'd gotten it at school, I would slap a lawsuit on that school district so fast, their heads would spin, and I'm not the litigious sort...

Reply

I agree. the pill has major medical complications in some cases. I, for example, have had some pretty far reaching hormonal issues with certain brands. Are these teenagers, and young ones at that, going to be responsible with follow up? How will this affect their other medical and sexual decisions? I can guarantee you that I would rather have a child, even at that age, on birth control than pregnant. Or on birth control if other issues (i.e. heavy periods, anemia, other drugs with major side effects) warranted it. But I want to be conversant with my child about the risks and benefits of what she is putting in her body. Putting virtual strangers at the school in charge of my child's medical care is NOT an option.

Plus, think about the social ramifications. You know that before long, there will be peer pressure to be on the Pill. So kids will do it just to be cool, and there is another whole issue in and of itself.

Reply

Do you think it is possible to educated a pregnant teen? Do you think she is focused on her school work? Why shouldn't the school get involved? Everyone is quick to blame the education department when the students are not performing to their potential. The parents need to perform at their potential as well and that is not happening. It would not have to be a problem resolved in the education department if the parents were taking a more active interest in their child's lives. My 2 cents.

Reply

I have mixed feelings about it. It's easy enough to say "Just go to Planned Parenthood", but there are many towns where it is hundreds of miles to one. My hometown's local health clinic only provides birth control if having -another- kid would be a financial hardship by their standards.

Some girls have nowhere to turn if there's not a safety net of an involved parent, Planned Parenthood or a non religious low income health unit. Most of the girls I know who had babies in 6th-8th grade were being abused by a family member and their mothers would rather believe they were sleeping around than a favorite family member was secretly a monster. You can't exactly go to your mom and say "Well if you won't stop my abuser, can't you at least help me avoid getting pregnant by him?" if she doesn't believe you in the first place.

I think the schools should have a referral service if there is a Planned Parenthood or low income health unit available. But for places like my hometown, where there are no other options for girls, I would have a hard time not supporting the development of a similar program if they had mandatory follow ups and worked with the child's primary care physician.

Reply

I said this last week and wasn't going to respond again today but...if only one child needs this then I'm for it. Abuse was the number #1 thing I was thinking of as Caitlin so well pointed out. There are bad sides to every issue and it's NOT for everyone. It's so easy to sit here and say "I'll take care of my child myself," but the sad fact is that not all kids have someone to talk to.

Reply

Joy and Jamie, you're both still thinking that only the kids who need this "help" will get it. One of the problems with such a policy is that it covers all kids who have access to the health center, not just the ones with the lousy parents. It's not going to be very helpful to the girl with the blot clot family history if she doesn't get pregnant but dies of a blood clot caused by the drugs given to her by people who don't know about her family history. "Mr. and Mrs. Smith, the good news is that we protected your 11 yr old from getting pregnant because you didn't care enough to do it. The bad news is that we killed her because we didn't know she shouldn't have had that particular drug (because you didn't care enough to tell us)."

Surely you're not saying that if one girl keeps from getting pregnant, it's worth the risk to the other girls who might suffer serious consequences due to the ignorance of the health center staff.

I should not have to put my kids at such risk to help that one kid. In reality, it wouldn't really be my kid at risk because the health center folks would know better than to "help" my kids this way. I see the truth in these programs and know enough to duck when I hear, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help!" However, there are plenty of parents out there who wouldn't be as proactive (not because they're not good parents, but perhaps because they don't realize that their kids will be put in danger) and *their* kids very well might be harmed by this clinic.

Reply

Roger, thank you for this post.

To one of the posters above: if a child is a victim of incest, what she needs is NOT the pill! She needs to be removed from that environment! Or are there people who think it's OK for a child to be raped as long as she doesn't get pregnant? If a child has the courage to go to the school nurse because she's having sex, the school nurse needs to give her ALL the help she needs, not send her back into the hell she is trying to get out of! Even if it's "consensual" sex it is not healthy for someone so young, under ANY circumstances, and social / psychological intervention is needed.

I already posted, under a previous article, all my reasons why I think the policy of giving the "pill" to youngsters is disgusting and harmful to every single girl in such a school. So I won't go over it again here.

Reply

I just went and listeded to the story again to make sure I remembered what I'd heard the other night on the evening news. You do need a parents signature to be allowed into this clinic and it's NOT run by the school. So not just anyone can go to it. It's been there for quite a few years now with other contraception devices avaliable for the students.

Reply

Another likely negative result of this policy is that some parents will not allow their children to go to the health center at all. (Since apparently permission to use the health center equals permission to take the pill.) I would probably decline permission, instead opting for the teacher / nurse to call me if my kids need attention. So if the health center is doing anything that might actually benefit mainstream kids, that benefit will be lost. And if enough parents take this stance, pretty soon the taxpayers' funding for the health center will be gone.

Reply

Joy, can we go to email? I would like to take this discussion around a wind-y bend without dragging everyone else along.

Remove the spaces and please make the subject "Sandyone" so I don't delete your email! Thanks!

h in ch ing bro ok ep ar k @ ya ho o.c o m

Reply

I wonder if a young girl who was being abused would even go to a health center for birth control? That might feel like she was endorsing the abuse (to herself) or she might just want to avoid thinking about the abuse in any way-including birth control. To just pretend it wasn't happening. Not mature but we are talking about middle-schoolers here.

Reply

I totally agree with SandyOne - there are other institutions in place (mandatory reporting, CPS, etc.) to help girls who are the victims of incest - they don't need the pill, they need to be removed from the situation where the abuse is occurring.

Amy @ http://prettybabies.blogspot.com

Reply

I went to three differnt middle schools and two differnt highschools,none of these schools allowed school employees give out any medication. Not even Advil for a head ache. Students were not allowed to have any kind of medication on their person. If a student was supposed to take medication during school hours, the student had to have a letter from the doctor and from the parent. If a student was found with any kind of medication on their person, the student was suspended, sometimes expelled depending on the medication. How are schools getting around this? Are they not afraid of the liability? Handing out condoms is one thing, but prescription medication is another. I was under the impression that you have to be a pharmacist to dispense medication. What about having a PRESCRIPTION? I didn't know that schools employed licensed doctors and pharmacists now. Must be nice.

Reply

Caitlin said, "I have mixed feelings about it."
Feelings should not influence the policy decision. They should be considered, but logic and common sense, tempered by compassion, are what drive good policy, not feelings.

"My hometown's local health clinic only provides birth control if having -another- kid would be a financial hardship by their standards."

Then 11 year old kids, who aren't old enough to hold down a job (so why are we saying it's ok for them to have sex??), would be covered under their policy. They don't need a school clinic.

"Some girls have nowhere to turn if there's not a safety net of an involved parent, Planned Parenthood or a non religious low income health unit."

Showing a little bias, here. A religious based low income health unit can be plenty of help for a kid who's considering having sex. It seems that you don't want the girls being subject to evangelization from religious groups, but it's ok from secular groups. Why is that? Girls can still turn to a guidance counselor or a trusted teacher. They can still confide in the school nurse, but the nurse doesn't have to dispense dangerous medications to her in order to help her.

"Most of the girls I know who had babies in 6th-8th grade were being abused by a family member and their mothers would rather believe they were sleeping around than a favorite family member was secretly a monster. You can't exactly go to your mom and say 'Well if you won't stop my abuser, can't you at least help me avoid getting pregnant by him?' if she doesn't believe you in the first place."

The school does not have to be permitted to hand out BCPs in order to help a girl stop being raped. A mother has an "excuse" (a sorry-ass one, but it is very common) for being in denial. For someone outside the family, it is unconscionable for them to just give out birth control and let the girl go back to her rapist. That's disgusting, yet it is a very likely course of action at a clinic like this.

"I think the schools should have a referral service if there is (sic) a Planned Parenthood or low income health unit available. But for places like my hometown, where there are no other options for girls, I would have a hard time not supporting the development of a similar program if they had mandatory follow ups and worked with the child's primary care physician."

Are you still talking about the girl in a molesting situation or do you mean for the average 11-14 yr old who just wants some sex (do young girls really want to have sex or do they just want to please their boyfriend)? Either way, is it in the girl's best interest to do all of this behind her parents' backs? Is there something wrong with contacting the parents and letting them know that their daughter is sexually active and taking drugs that will impact her current and future health? Even crappy parents who don't care should just say, "Fine. Whatever. You just make sure she doesn't get pregnant."

You see, these are not the kind of parents that this program seeks to circumvent. Schools can do pretty much whatever they want when dealing with apathetic parents. It's the children of the parents who have strong objections to children having sex and/or children ingesting artificial hormones who are the primary "beneficiaries/targets" of this program.

Feelings are great, but relying on them leads to thinking that this program might be a good idea. If you look at it objectively, it's impossible to see how this program could truly benefit young kids.

Joy said, "You do need a parents signature to be allowed into this clinic and it's NOT run by the school."

True, but any child authorized access to the clinic is also authorized access to birth control. So, if you want your kid to be screened for scoliosis, vision problems or dispensed asthma medication, you are also presenting your kid for birth control.

Reply