Why is the Government giving free Contraception when sex is on the decline?

Commoner · 15-09-2022 9:33am #1

Yesterday, Government Politicians began the official rollout of free contraception to women aged 17-25. Unfortunately, it seems the Government is ignoring the reality:

Fewer people are having sex than they did in previous decades - especially in the share of younger adults. We are seeing a decline of sex among young adults. Both young people and adults are having less sex than ever before. In the space of a generation, sex has gone from something most students have experienced to something most haven’t. This trend is also happening across the western world. The Government seems to have done a copycat of the French proposal for free contraception except our Government has sought to create an age distinction by categorizing the age of eligibility for free contraception. Having to give a PPS number also poses an obvious challenge.

How does the Government reconcile a population in decline and the hike to the pension age? Shouldn't we be encouraging more people to have children?

Cookie_Monster · 15-09-2022 9:42am

why has 25 been chosen arbitrarily, do you suddenly get richer at that age?

osarusan · 15-09-2022 9:44am

I don't see any connection between contracepton being free or not and people having less sex and/or a declining birthrate.

Ray Palmer · 15-09-2022 9:49am

Where is the information that people are having less sex. Is this related to the time where people weren’t able to meet up and colleges were remote?

15-09-2022 9:51am

why not offer free contraception?

accidental kids arent the answer to very many of your questions

Pissy Missy · 15-09-2022 9:51am

Seeing as we're over populated as it is, it's probably for the best

Montage of Feck · 15-09-2022 9:57am

If we now have abortion and free contraception, isn't it about time we abolished child benefit?

EmmetSpiceland · 15-09-2022 10:04am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620945#Comment_119620945

Does seem a bit odd. Maybe they expect the majority of people to be working or, at least, able to pay their own way at that age. But it hasn’t been explained.

timmyntc · 15-09-2022 10:07am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621056#Comment_119621056

Because it's about being seen to be doing something, rather than doing it properly.

The government in next election manifesto can say:

"In our previous term we made female contraception free*"

RobbieTheRobber · 15-09-2022 10:13am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058263463/why-is-the-government-giving-free-contraception-when-sex-is-on-the-decline

Who gave Enoch access to the internet again?

Loafing Oaf · 15-09-2022 10:17am

news for you OP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5RJbBIfUxk

The Continental Op · 15-09-2022 10:28am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620987#Comment_119620987

Think this must be the OP's personal experience ;-)

dontmindme · 15-09-2022 10:31am

niice...women still responsible for bringing the jonnies

Commoner · 15-09-2022 11:20am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621175#Comment_119621175

Nope 😂

From the Munster Express (14th Nov 2018):

"People Are Having Less and Less Sex"

"Birth rates in Western countries have been falling for some years now for a variety of reasons and part of the reason is that people are engaging in sex less often than their parents and grandparents....

In The Times survey, a total of 7 per cent said they had not had sex in the past year. People who had sex less than once a week amounted to 27 per cent; less than once a month, 22 per cent; once to twice a week, 30 per cent and three times or more a week, 14 per cent. These figures strongly suggest less people are having sex than in previous times"

rob316 · 15-09-2022 11:31am

Are people having less sex? What gives you that idea.

Allinall · 15-09-2022 11:35am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621025#Comment_119621025

What difference would that make?

Geuze · 15-09-2022 11:37am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621414#Comment_119621414

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/11/the-sex-recession.html

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/03/american-sexual-frequency-estimates-day.html

American adults had sex about nine fewer times per year in the early 2010s compared to the late 1990s in data from the nationally representative General Social Survey, N = 26,620, 1989–2014. This was partially due to the higher percentage of unpartnered individuals, who have sex less frequently on average. Sexual frequency declined among the partnered (married or living together) but stayed steady among the unpartnered, reducing the marital/partnered advantage for sexual frequency. Declines in sexual frequency were similar across gender, race, region, educational level, and work status and were largest among those in their 50s, those with school-age children, and those who did not watch pornography. In analyses separating the effects of age, time period, and cohort, the decline was primarily due to birth cohort (year of birth, also known as generation). With age and time period controlled, those born in the 1930s (Silent generation) had sex the most often, whereas those born in the 1990s (Millennials and iGen) had sex the least often. The decline was not linked to longer working hours or increased pornography use. Age had a strong effect on sexual frequency: Americans in their 20s had sex an average of about 80 times per year, compared to about 20 times per year for those in their 60s. The results suggest that Americans are having sex less frequently due to two primary factors: An increasing number of individuals without a steady or marital partner and a decline in sexual frequency among those with partners.

Here is the article, by Twenge, Sherman, and Wells, via the excellent Kevin Lewis.

Geuze · 15-09-2022 11:39am

Condoms are widely available for 1 euro each.

Why does the Govt need to intervene in the market?

Is there some sort of market failure?

Jequ0n · 15-09-2022 11:39am

Why would it not be free for teenagers younger than 17? That makes no sense at all.

Strumms · 15-09-2022 11:53am

Condoms retail for next to nothing these days.

so not affording them is not a legitimate excuse. It’s bullshït.

anyone not using who should it’s not because of availability or affordability, it’s because they don’t want to.

Strumms · 15-09-2022 11:55am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621447#Comment_119621447

Legal age of consent is 17… I get your point but legally it would not be clever.

15-09-2022 12:02pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621447#Comment_119621447

One of the more nonsense arguments I have heard from people who are against contraception and sexual education in children - is to suggest that giving children either will incentivize them to be more likely to actually try / have sex. I would suspect therefore that the decision not to afford contraception to under 17s is in part influenced by that kind of nonsense thinking.

Other than this I suspect they are probably (and unfortunately) motivated to keep this law in line with the legal age of sexual consent.

One would of course hope and prefer that the age range they selected was influenced by things like A) When people are deemed more and less likely to be able to afford long term contraception and B) At what ages the majority of unwanted or crisis pregnancies actually occur. This is data I personally do not have. But let's hope that the age bracket they have selected does impact such data in the best way possible.

EDIT: Actually the article in the Examiner does claim "The Department of Health said targeting females aged 17-25 was based on research finding this age group is the most likely to experience crisis pregnancy, and is also the group of females least likely to be financially independent.". So looks like what I wrote just above fits what they claim they are doing. So that's heartening at least.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621182#Comment_119621182

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621445#Comment_119621445

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621497#Comment_119621497

Not sure the scheme has anything to do with condoms? Isn't it related to female contraception? From the RTE: "The deal covers the pill and long-lasting contraception, including coil insertions and women will need to show their PPS number as eligibility will be checked.".

However I wonder how much privilege is attached to the "they retail for next to nothing" or "Sure each one is only a euro" kind of thinking. A few euro here and there might be nothing to you or me. But let's not assume that is true of everyone. There are people stuggling to survive on the few Euros they do have without adding 5, 10, 20 or who knows how much to their weekly or monthly budget. Is someone trying to ratio out milk to their kids for their cereal really going around thinking "ah sure a few condoms at a euro each, no issue there!"?

But as this scheme has nothing to do with condoms, that is a moot point really. This is targetted at a different form of contraception and as the Examiner reports:

"the cost of accessing contraception — particularly for those financially dependent on parents or guardians, or those who may be just above the means-tested thresholds for medical cards and GP visit cards — may impose a significant barrier to access.

Costs for the pill and similar repeat prescription contraceptives can be estimated at €65 to €100 every six months, and the initial costs of long-acting reversible contraception, including consultation, purchase of the device, and fitting, typically range from €250-€320. If removal costs are included, this can rise to €340-€470"

Donald Trump · 15-09-2022 12:17pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620945#Comment_119620945

They want to encourage young ladies to partake in sexytime.

25+ ..... well not so much. Past their sell-by date at that stage

Although some in government have expressed concern at the recent hiring of Leonardo Di Caprio as a secret advisor to the Taoiseach, I would argue that his heart is in the right place.

Pherekydes · 15-09-2022 12:23pm

Sounds like a good idea.

But...

...why 17 and 25? Have any 15 or 16 year olds ever conceived a child? What about those older than 25? Did the government consult with Leonardo about this?

And condoms versus female contraception? You really haven't worked out why they haven't gone with free condoms for all?

Commoner · 15-09-2022 12:24pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621540#Comment_119621540

But the Government previously cut core social welfare rates for under-25's and restoring the pre-2010 weekly rates for under-25's would be a far better way to address the cost burden.

AMKC · 15-09-2022 12:26pm

Sure the NHS in the UK have been doing this since the 70s so it's about time we caught up. I was doing the sums last night and if they add 7 years extra every year for the next 3 to 4 years lol then I will eventually be able to avail of it too not that I need to to or want to at the moment.

As for the-age thing well they have to start somewhere and sure maybe they are hoping that more people will have sex now with less fear of becoming pregnant or getting the Woman pregnant so maybe they will fall in love with someone eventually and then more babies will be had with couples who are happy together.

15-09-2022 12:28pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621606#Comment_119621606

My post was discussing the scheme in and of itself. That there might be better or worse methods to attain the same thing is of course possible and is above my pay grade :) A good idea remains a good idea - even if a better idea exists though. If there is a better way to attain the same benefits by all means campaign for it!

Especially if you can explain how and why your idea is "better" more clearly than merely declaring it to be so.

And that your idea will attain in practice what you declare it will in theory.

For example merely giving people more money does not ensure they will use that money in the way we might prefer. So for example giving someone free access to 470 euro of contraception is not exactly the same thing as simply handing them 470 euro. The latter is also going to cost significantly more too.

Also which Social Welfare payments specifically? What about the women not in receipt of any such payments? Why would your approach be better for them than merely making the contraceptives in question free of charge?

ohnonotgmail · 15-09-2022 12:31pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621589#Comment_119621589

Leo?

Commoner · 15-09-2022 12:35pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621601#Comment_119621601

Let me guess: some prejudicial stereotype that we shouldn't trust men because they might sabotage the condom?

Loafing Oaf · 15-09-2022 12:37pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621606#Comment_119621606

Yes but

Pherekydes · 15-09-2022 12:42pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621662#Comment_119621662

Stealthily does it!

ohnonotgmail · 15-09-2022 12:45pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621662#Comment_119621662

Maybe women would like to be in control of their own fertility? no reason why the man can't wear a condom as well and they probably should.

Sardonicat · 15-09-2022 12:47pm

Hormonal contraception is more reliable than condoms at preventing pregnancy. So this will encourage more young women to visit their GP and sort out a reliable form of contraception. Hormonal contraception is also prescribed to treat very painful or very heavy periods and to regulate irregular menstrual cycles, not just for contraception purposes.

Princess Calla · 15-09-2022 1:00pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119620945#Comment_119620945

I'd say it's keeping in line with full time education, degree, masters, post grad etc.

Ray Palmer · 15-09-2022 2:10pm

my experience with contraception growing up. Teenagers having sex were not legally able to buy condoms then entering college you could get them as they were legal and actually been given out free in college. Girlfriend at the time went to the college doctor to get the pill. The nurse tried to talk her out of getting the pill because I only wanted to use her for sex.

Next girlfriend was French and her dad brought her at 15 to get the pill when she asked to go on it.

Sunny Disposition · 15-09-2022 3:12pm

Why on earth are condoms not being provided to men if women are getting free contraception?

Loafing Oaf · 15-09-2022 3:35pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621601#Comment_119621601

What about those older than 25? Did the government consult with Leonardo about this?

Your 'gag' is relying on an outdated perception of the movie star in question

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/leonardo-dicaprio-47-gigi-hadid-27977466

27? Be surprised if she even needed contraception tbh...

Girl Geraldine · 15-09-2022 3:39pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622235#Comment_119622235

To be fair the nurse had her best interests at heart and in a large portion of relationships that is all it is some fella feigning interest in order to have a chance to at a regular bulling.

Girl Geraldine · 15-09-2022 3:40pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622493#Comment_119622493

Because men won't be dependable in using them. And anyway, it is the woman who is at risk of getting pregnant, she has more to loose so it is going to make more sense to protect her.

Sleepy · 15-09-2022 3:43pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119621447#Comment_119621447

Presumably because we have an age of consent of 17 and providing those younger than that with contraception could be construed as encouraging children to break the law.

Not saying I agree with it, but government agencies must be seen to be upholding the law of that government.

timetogo1 · 15-09-2022 3:44pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622493#Comment_119622493

Probably depends on the goal. Seems like it's to prevent pregnancy. Ultimately that's a consequence on the female.

I'd say condoms should be included too though. Taking the pill won't do much to prevent STDs. I'd say at the moment it's a cost thing. It's step one.

15-09-2022 3:56pm

It all has to do with culture.

Does anyone notice how the moral panic about teen pregnancies and actual teen pregnancies decline once women had other options such as careers, jobs, and education?

Maybe the hedonistic free for all sexual revolution was a blip in human society and now we are reverting a bit. There is no such thing as uncomplicated sex.

The internet, you people go out less often and drink less although they are taking more drugs, while alcohol lowers inhibition I'm not sure what drugs do for inhibition.

More information and less inhibitions about sex and sexuality mean young people, in general, have more sense and therefore sex isn't the big deal it once was.

There are a million and one reasons but mostly it's cultural.

is_that_so · 15-09-2022 4:05pm

Sounds like a women's health initiative at work and €25m is a cheap price for it. It's a common enough arrangement worldwide, either free or partially subsidised.

Larbre34 · 15-09-2022 4:08pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622235#Comment_119622235

It's called progress.

When I was a child, my parents had to get a prescription for condoms as they didn't want more children, so they told me years later. They weren't particularly religious or bothered about other people, but all the same they filled the prescription near my Dad's work as they didn't trust the local Pharmacist not to be gossiping, something for which he was known. That was the early 80s.

In 1991 when I was 14, I very clearly remember the legal conflict, when the Irish Family Planning Association set up a stand for selling condoms within the new Virgin Megastore in Dublin City Centre and sold condoms in defiance of the law. It was quite exciting to be in there on a Saturday with my mates and watching these stand-offs with the Guards. As a result of the IFPA highlighting the ridiculousness of the law, the law was changed.

By 1993 when I became sexually active, I was able to buy condoms in the local petrol station shop from my mate who worked there.

I remember girlfriends and partners being delighted to be able to get the pill from Women's health clinics and Liberal GPs, although it cost us a bit at the time.

Its worth noting that this new initiative only offers free oral medical and internal long release contraceptives for women of 17-25,nothing is available to men, but then again free condoms are widely available in Colleges and from many health promotion organisations. My concern would be those not connected to these options missing out.

However, this is a very good step and I'm pleased to hear Stephen Donnelly say that health providers will have discretion to provide these to under 17 and over 25s, where they see the need.

Yes, it seems to be the case that sex among younger people is declining and maybe the more insular online World has something to do with that, but thats no reason not to offer free and readily accessible contraceptives and sexual health support to young people who want to explore their sexuality and have a full and active sex life. More power to them.

Strumms · 15-09-2022 4:20pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622710#Comment_119622710

absolute state of some hospital waiting lists in this country and 25 million being spent on condoms..

last year there was a period were 235 children were on significant paediatric cardiology waiting lists…

that 25 million getting in more surgeons, doctors, anaesthesiologists, beds etc ? and cutting waiting lists….. no…buy 25 million worth of condoms. Ok.

is_that_so · 15-09-2022 4:26pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622773#Comment_119622773

It's a lot more than condoms, it's the whole range of contraception as I understand it, including IUDs. This money will be spent. In terms of overall health spend it is buttons and this is not taking money from other things. Bear in mind that every 1% increase in public pay costs €250m. €25m only gets you about 100 consultants on public contracts IF you can find them in the first place.

timetogo1 · 15-09-2022 5:05pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622773#Comment_119622773

The annual cost of unintended pregnancies in the US is 5.5billion.

https://www.rtihs.org/publications/economic-burden-unintended-pregnancy-united-states

Wonder what the cost is here considering our social assistance seems to be more (per capita) than the US.

Princess Calla · 15-09-2022 5:11pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622773#Comment_119622773

It's not being spent on condoms.

It is being spent on female contraceptives.

Many women would be taking these for health reasons....regulate their cycle, in an attempt to lessen "the flow" , pain management etc.

There are many women taking contraceptives that are not in a sexual relationship or are in a same sex relationship.

So to say it's being spent in condoms .....which I don't think a single cent is being spent on here....is minimizing the issue.

Now if they could take the luxury tax off tampons that be great!!!

Goldengirl · 15-09-2022 5:19pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622601#Comment_119622601

While I don't disagree with your opinion it would make a lot of sense to offer free condoms as well not only to reduce STDs but to protect those who don't avail of or are not entitled to avail of the free contraception.

Many children younger than 17 are engaging in sexual relationships and it is typical Irish head in the sand stuff not to recognise this . Of course numbers of those presenting with crisis pregnancies are higher in the 17 to 25 age group , but it doesn't mean that all sexually active girls and women should not be included in this .

Another thing that struck me when I heard about this is that period poverty is not addressed yet either . The cost of sanitary pads and tampons is outside the reach of a lot of young women especially now with the price of so many other necessities going up .

Larbre34 · 15-09-2022 5:27pm

Where do you draw the line though? Nappy poverty? Moisturiser poverty? Toothpaste poverty? Toilet roll poverty?

Yes, I completely get that tampons and STs are expensive to buy, but there are a whole host of products that people need for a certain period (no pun intended) of their lives and its about ensuring that there is a basic guaranteed income for those that need it to make their own discretionary choices according to their needs at the time.

Goldengirl · 15-09-2022 5:27pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119622717#Comment_119622717

Very much agree with your post .

While it is good that they have brought this in , it is not enough , as my post above outlines.

But it's not good that they will have discretionary access for these under or over the guided aged group .

I remember searching for a sympathetic GP in a different county back in the day , to access the pill aged 18 when I was considered old enough to vote , live and work away from home , but not to have sex . Humiliating .

And now this means that those under the age will have to go cap in hand to get themselves protection , and risk refusal .

They won't do that , and will just continue unprotected .

Why is the Government giving free Contraception when sex is on the decline?

Comments