Springfield schools to provide pre-teens with condoms
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (WHDH) -- Condoms may soon be available for students as young as 12-years-old in Springfield public schools. The school committee voted five to one in favor of the new policy in an effort to prevent STD’s and pregnancy.Now, I'd be interested to know where they get the information that sexual activity is going down. They're making the claim here; it's their responsibility to back it up - let's see how they ascertained that by handing out free condoms, the amount of sex these kids are having is decreasing. I don't buy it. I'm guessing the age comes from middle schools, which are typically grades 6 through 8. TheBoy will be in sixth grade next year, so this is pretty close to home here. It's nothing new - my sister knew a girl in her 8th grade class that got pregnant - but the distribution of condoms to middle schoolers is something new.
"Where they've instituted this program, the incidents have -- not only sexually transmitted diseases, but sexual activity itself -- have decreased," said Christopher Collins, Springfield school committee.
I just don't understand why it's the purview of the schools to do the distribution. "Kids will do it anyways" is a cop-out - they're also going to drink alcohol and use drugs; using that same logic the nurse should hand out a six pack of Bud Light and a hookah, too. It's a health issue, certainly - they're claiming the schools are trying to prevent sexually transmitted diseases - but shouldn't that be handled in a sex ed class?
It's just striking how kids need a doctor's note to take Advil but can get condoms from the nurse in sixth grade.
That is all.
Courtesy of PISSED, who e-mailed me the story saying "This is all yours
11 comments:
Ah, I do hope the school authorities are warning the boys that (in a lot of states) if they do that activity that requires condoms, they or their partner are potentially committing a felony.
Yes, the double-standards are amazing, especially since it does not stop kids from bringing stuff from home to pass around anyway. IIRC a gal in AZ got in hot water last month for raiding her parents' medicine cabinet and handing out what she thought were uppers. In an adult they would have been, but in prepubescent kids it just made them sleepy.
LittleRed1
Advil is a medication. Unless the kids are allergic to latex, a condom isn't going to make 'em sick. I don't see what the big deal is, honestly.
@Christina LMT: poster "anonymous" described, the crime of statutory rape, which is not a minor matter.
How about condom failure? HIV/AIDs and all the other STDs that could be contracted if the condom is not used correctly, or tears.
What about pregnancy? Use of birth control is not a 100% sure thing.
How about the raw immaturity of so many kids to lose their innocence? Some will truly regret it soon or later when they get married.
Save us from these "enlightened" ones who know how we should live.
Please stay away from my kids!
i take offense to the hookah part. I smoke tobacco out of mine, not the funky hippy herbal kind either. Otherwise, spot on!
Well like Christina I can see the difference between taking an asprin / advil to school and a condom.
BUT that doesn't mean I agree with the school handing them out (nor, do I agree with the burning hoops and notarised forms for OTC medicine).
And the 'statutory rape' thing IS an issue. I would have thought by handing out condoms to underaged boys you could be charged as 'aiding in a felony', no?
So while I think it is different to the asprin situation I don't think it's right.
You know, they have a point. Kids will have sex anyway, so might as well give 'em free condoms.
By the same logic, kids will be exposed to violence anyway... so all MA kids should have mandatory weapons training. Knives, handguns, rifles, the whole nine yards.
Because If It Saves Just One Child, It's Worth It (tm).
In Cali, kids can't go tanning without a parent's permission, but they can get an abortion.
It ain't the funniest end of civilization ever for nothing.
*sigh*
Here's my take. If a child wants to have sex, he/she will have sex. If a child isn't interested/knows better/doesn't cave to peer pressure, etc., he/she won't have sex.
So if they DO have it, it's better if protection is available. I don't think having condoms available at school is going to encourage the kids who aren't interested to begin with, but the ones who ARE interested can get the condoms.
It's just not that complicated in my book.
Sort of reminds me of the decline of Rome - we're crumbling with rot from the inside. Kind of sad, but since I'm a "glass half full kind of guy" I sure do like living in a country where I can CCW.
HankH
Remind me what schools are for again?
They've done such a fine job teaching reading, writing, and 'rithmetic -- I'm sure they'll do just fine with sex-ed.
(/sarc)
Clearly a crime. Giving somebody else's kid a condom is contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and is a lewd act.
A vending machine at least would be impersonal. But a human giving somebody else's kid a condom - that is clearly child molestation. There is no possible way to interact with a child, that involves giving that child a condom, that is not molestation.
Post a Comment