Should all girls over 17 be offered the pill?

eimearcmh

storm2811 wrote: »

:eek:
How old are you?
Sorry, I know it's kind of a personal question but it sounds like something that would have happened when sex was never talked about.
I couldn't imagine it happening today!

Under 25:D An outside educator was brought in to explain the facts of life lesson but i don't remember ''those'' facts of life being explained. It was a girls school too.

johnmcdnl

storm2811 wrote: »

:eek:
How old are you?
Sorry, I know it's kind of a personal question but it sounds like something that would have happened when sex was never talked about.
I couldn't imagine it happening today!

I'm just starting college this year and I've never had a sex ed class in my life - Now I know about the pill and condoms and STDs and all that but it wasn't because someone taught me - I had to learn myself

really is a joke like in fairness


EDIT - some nuns or someone came into us in Junior cert and told us just not to have sex ever unless we were married - think it was CURA but the one was a 60 year old woman one of the lads asked whether condoms were good and she said we don't agree with condoms because you shouldn't be having sex at all....

god that was a useful lecture from them

PeterIanStaker

You can give them all the pill they want, but it wont stop the scangers having kids "fer de choil' beneffihhh"

Twilightning

Stinicker wrote: »

The pill promotes promiscuity and the spread of disease.

I really can't believe people in this day and age have attitudes towards the pill as blatantly ignorant as this one.

storm2811

eimearcmh wrote: »

Under 25:D An outside educator was brought in to explain the facts of life lesson but i don't remember ''those'' facts of life being explained. It was a girls school too.

johnmcdnl wrote: »

I'm just starting college this year and I've never had a sex ed class in my life - Now I know about the pill and condoms and STDs and all that but it wasn't because someone taught me - I had to learn myself

really is a joke like in fairness

Jesus,that really is a joke I agree.
I went to a strict enough Catholic school and we were given sex ed classes in 5th and 6th class.
Then in 3rd year we learned about contraception,STDs etc,though we already knew a fair bit about them.

I can't believe all schools don't do this!

Johro

Gary4279 wrote: »

Surely she cant be as good a mother as a thirty year old woman.

That's crap. There's plenty of thirty-ish mothers out there who aren't great parents, to say the least. Being young can be a big advantage when you're bringing up a child, also, being a good parent has a lot to do with the support you get from family and friends.
You see a lot of young mothers being criticised for having babies too young, but criticising is easy, anyone can do it. Try be helpful instead.
Another thing, it takes two people. Why should the girl be the one to go on the pill? The pill doesn't suit everyone either, lots of problems associated with it. Lots of problems with your post too.

Johro

mojesius wrote: »

No, because a free pill from 16 sends a message that you should be having sex from that age.

Seriously? A free pill that destroys free will?

Gary4279

Johro wrote: »

That's crap. There's plenty of thirty-ish mothers out there who aren't great parents, to say the least. Being young can be a big advantage when you're bringing up a child, also, being a good parent has a lot to do with the support you get from family and friends.
You see a lot of young mothers being criticised for having babies too young, but criticising is easy, anyone can do it. Try be helpful instead.
Another thing, it takes two people. Why should the girl be the one to go on the pill? The pill doesn't suit everyone either, lots of problems associated with it. Lots of problems with your post too.

i couldn't agree with you more. thats why there is a choice. a ****ing choice. if you feel you wish to avail of it then you can.

there are lots of ****e parents out there. its sad. but why add to that. why ruin a childs life and why ruin the child, who is having a child's life.

eimearcmh

storm2811 wrote: »

Jesus,that really is a joke I agree.
I went to a strict enough Catholic school and we were given sex ed classes in 5th and 6th class.
Then in 3rd year we learned about contraception,STDs etc,though we already knew a fair bit about them.

I can't believe all schools don't do this!

Yeah i definitely think there should be more education and classes given about these issues. Only 1 girl out of 80ish got pregnant in 6th year though.
I should add that we did learn about STD's.

eimearcmh

johnmcdnl wrote: »

I'm just starting college this year and I've never had a sex ed class in my life - Now I know about the pill and condoms and STDs and all that but it wasn't because someone taught me - I had to learn myself

really is a joke like in fairness


EDIT - some nuns or someone came into us in Junior cert and told us just not to have sex ever unless we were married - think it was CURA but the one was a 60 year old woman one of the lads asked whether condoms were good and she said we don't agree with condoms because you shouldn't be having sex at all....

god that was a useful lecture from them

Excuse the pun:D

Rycn

They should be allowed access to it if they want it at 17.

Owwmykneecap

Dudess wrote: »

Yes he is.

Your hypothetical daughter probably won't be breaking the news to you when it happens.

Hence operation cornflake.

And if it does kill libido like you say, it will be the first time in over 125 years of production that cornflakes actually prevented a ****. Kellogg will be finally able to rest in peace.

Johro

BluesBerry wrote: »

But it shouldn't be made easy for them when they have a baby and all the entitlements they get when they have the baby They have it too easy

Haha. Yeah.. Bringing up a little one is a breeze.

Sticky_Fingers

EDIT - some nuns or someone came into us in Junior cert and told us just not to have sex ever unless we were married - think it was CURA but the one was a 60 year old woman one of the lads asked whether condoms were good and she said we don't agree with condoms because you shouldn't be having sex at all....

god that was a useful lecture from them

I'd say if she had her way she'd have shipped the lad of to the laundries or whatever the male equivalent was for asking such an impure question. No wonder this country is in the state its in when celibates are considered qualified to be giving out advice on safe sex.

Stinicker

Twilightning wrote: »

I really can't believe people in this day and age have attitudes towards the pill as blatantly ignorant as this one.

Welcome to the 21st Century, The pill alone is responsible for the greatest crisis facing Europe this century. The very existence of the European race... whether women like it or not part of their existence on this earth is to procreate and if our parents took the same arrogant approach to this important topic as today women take then most of us would not be around. Population decline alone will destroy the economies of Western Europe and a womans place is firstly as a mother and a homemaker. Now suck on that liberal pinkos neo-feminists.

Sticky_Fingers

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

Hence operation cornflake.

And if it does kill libido like you say, it will be the first time in over 125 years of production that cornflakes actually prevented a ****. Kellogg will be finally able to rest in peace.

If your plan works the only cock she'll be seeing will be on the cereal box:pac:

Johro

Gary4279 wrote: »

i couldn't agree with you more. thats why there is a choice. a ****ing choice. if you feel you wish to avail of it then you can.

there are lots of ****e parents out there. its sad. but why add to that. why ruin a childs life and why ruin the child, who is having a child's life.

Nah that's too general a view. Sure everyone has a choice but not everyone has the same opportunities, education, family support etc.
I wouldn't think many teenage pregnancies were planned, would you? Sh!t happens. It's not ideal, but when it's happened it's happened and better to help and make sure that support is there rather than to say 'How could you be so stupid, why didn't you take the pill'.

redstar6

If you go to a doctor in the UK and asked to be put on the pill, you get the prescription for free. It doesn't appear to have any effect on the number of young mothers though.:eek:

moonflower

It should definitely be available free. I have quite a few friends who couldn't afford the crazy €50 doctors fee to get the pill and were too embarrassed to ask their parents for the money so they just chanced it, some of them for quite some time.

mojesius

mojesius wrote: »

No, because a free pill from 16 sends a message that you should be having sex from that age.

Yeah, so what? What's wrong with having sex as a teenager? The human body is mostly developed sexually at that stage, which is why everyone does it.

It's better to let them have access to something which will protect them from pregnancy instead of taking the shockingly backwards stance of "WELL YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT, SO YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANY HELP!" It's like a baby throwing a fit because his mammy won't let him have a lollipop, but in this case, our children aren't growing up to be sexually repressed, religious goody-goodies.

Erica<3

First of all OP, your assumption that a 30 year old mother would be a better mother than a 16 or 17 year old mother is complete bollocks. It is NOT about the age of the parent, but rather the love and care that that child is given by the parent. I know teenage mothers who are very good to their children, and I know a 36 year old mother who has royally ****ed up her two daughters' lives.

Now, yes the pill should be given to 17 year old girls because in the society we live in, it's probably the best option. If you're old enough to decide to have sex, you're old enough to decide to do it responsibly.

Besides, kids are going to be having sex regardless of whether you offer them a pill or not.

checkyabadself

Atari Jaguar.

Osgoodisgood

Stinicker wrote: »

Population decline alone will destroy the economies of Western Europe and a womans place is firstly as a mother and a homemaker. Now suck on that liberal pinkos neo-feminists.

Benito? Is that you?

Banned Account

17 year old girls should only be offered the pill if they promise to put out - it's just teasing otherwise.

aDeener

SadieSue wrote: »

Not everyone can take the pill, some have adverse reactions to it. Also the pill is not 100% effective. Proper sex education is what is needed. The pill does not protect against STD's.

i have often seen this line trotted out but what more education can there possibly be on the matter? the dangers of pregnancy and infections are already made known to youngsters so to use a great AH phrase, what more is there to ram down youngsters throats? - incidentally that phrase could end up preventing a lot of pregnancies :pac:

CK2010

BluesBerry wrote: »

I would disagree with 16 year olds getting the pill , But it shouldn't be made easy for them when they have a baby and all the entitlements they get when they have the baby They have it too easy, If they stopped all the benefits they hand out to teenage mothers the amount of "unplanned" pregnancies would drop

wow!

i'll admit that some teenage mothers dont need the amount of benefits they get because of their lifestyle-i.e no childcare fees, travel expenses.

but what about the ones who do need them, who dont want to live on benefits and do nothing with their lives? the ones who use up roughly 70% of their benefits on childcare so they can go to college and build a life for themself and their child.

who doesnt have a medical card as they'd rather not claim every benefit under sun, and yet has a child who needs regular prescriptions so continues to work for pittance in a job that refuses to give them enough hours to actually afford to come off the benefits, to make sure they can pay for the prescriptions/hospital fees (75 a night, thank god shes not in regularly!).

who uses the child benefit each month purely to pay off outstanding bills, and shock horror- not to buy alcohol!! :eek:

if i didnt have what little benefits i did get i would not now have my degree which will help me build my career so i dont need financial assistance. and it wasnt "too easy" like you say- there were times when i didnt have enough money from "all the handouts" they gave me (which didnt include a grant as i wasnt entitled- contrary to what you believe, a baby isnt a free pass to everything!) to even get the train into college let alone lunch or dinner.

so how on earth would you expect me to become a better person or give my child a chance in life without those benefits? hope i do it by myself and then complain about me being a waste and a drain on society when i cant afford to????

we're not all low life scum who got pregnant to get a free house. or who got pregnant because we didnt know about/use contraception for that matter.


as for the OP, i completely agree with it. (i dont agree with your comment on 30 year olds being better parents but i already had my rant! ) i think it should be made readily available for those who choose to use it and the person should be talked through the proper way to take it and the risks and problems associated with it.

philologos

OP: The State shouldn't have to mammy people into taking precautions that they should already know in advance to be taking. If they are taking the risk they should be aware of the consequences.

The money would be better spent in sex-ed to ensure that such situations don't arise to begin with. Increasing knowledge is a far better option. People at 17 should be starting to arrive at the position where they are starting to take responsibility for themselves.

mojesius

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah, so what? What's wrong with having sex as a teenager? The human body is mostly developed sexually at that stage, which is why everyone does it.

It's better to let them have access to something which will protect them from pregnancy instead of taking the shockingly backwards stance of "WELL YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT, SO YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANY HELP!" It's like a baby throwing a fit because his mammy won't let him have a lollipop, but in this case, our children aren't growing up to be sexually repressed, religious goody-goodies.

Oh ffs, where did I mention religion or sexual repression? Please don't tar me with that brush. Nor did I dicate that they shouldn't be having sex.

I was merely pointing out the downside of a freely-dispensed pill for a 16/17 year old. It sends a message that they should be having sex from that age, or at least thinking about it, even if they may feel they're not ready, society is telling them they actually are ready.

Being physically and emotionally ready for sex are completely different. And it's very much dependent on the individual, regardless of age in both cases.

On topic, the only thing teenagers need in this country is more open sex-ed. We had some aul cronie in our school every year telling us the safest contraception was 'no', 'just say no' (I think she may have even had tshirts). Hardly someone you could ask about how to get contraception etc.

The pill is a tenner a month, hardly breaking the bank. If someone can't/won't go to their family GP to get it, go to a different one or a well woman centre. I think rural areas definitely need more avenues for teens. In Dublin, there are countless options. If you can't use one of them, you shouldn't be doing it.

CK2010

mojesius wrote: »

The pill is a tenner a month, hardly breaking the bank. If someone can't/won't go to their family GP to get it, go to a different one or a well woman centre. I think rural areas definitely need more avenues for teens. In Dublin, there are countless options. If you can't use one of them, you shouldn't be doing it.

i dont think its the cost of the pill thats too expensive, its the GP visits, which afaik you need to go to every 6months for a bp check if you're on the pill. but afaik the well woman centres are cheaper for a consultation. edit: just checked- its not much cheaper!

mojesius

CK2010 wrote: »

i dont think its the cost of the pill thats too expensive, its the GP visits, which afaik you need to go to every 6months for a bp check if you're on the pill. but afaik the well woman centres are cheaper for a consultation. edit: just checked- its not much cheaper!

Forgot to mention GP costs, thanks. Yup, check-ups are a medical necessity if you're on the pill in case of DVT or other adverse conditions.

So the only way I can see this ludicrous free pill system working is by giving everyone from the age of 17 to whatever age the scheme supposedly ends a free medical card because they might be having sex. What a complete waste of money. As another poster just said, look at the UK with underage pregnancy.