[ElvisAint-Dead]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...-implants.html
-'Ministers have ordered council and health chief executives to increase the uptake of "long-acting" contraception in teen pregnancy "hot spots".'

-'The government also wants more school-based clinics to administer the jabs, which can make girls infertile for up to three months. '

-'Girls can recieve these without their parent's knowlegde'

Do you think girls as young as 13 should be encouraged into having contraceptive jabs and implants?

In my opinion i think that its a bad idea as it will result in even more teenagers having under age sex since they know that they won't get pregnant, it will cause a huge spread of sexualy transmitted diseases and might even cause an increase in the number of people with aids. Having the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe is better than having the highest rates of stds'.

Spoiler:

500th Post!

[*Star*Guitar*]

My other concern would be that girls are still growing, and there is the potential for the increased risk of osteoporosis if they have the injection. I've had it since I was 15 and I've been pretty responsible though.
It doesn't make a difference either way, without the girl being fully informed of contraceptives and risks, which is where I still think the main problem lies.

[lemily]

Taking the pill doesn't stop you getting STDs either and that is the most commonly prescribed contraceptive at the moment (after condoms). The pill has more of a chance at being ineffective because teenagers (especially those closer to 13) are more likely to take it incorrectly, lessening its effectiveness. At least with a long acting method like the injection or the implant there is less human error. And yes, as with the pill, they should still be taught to use condoms as well etc etc.

So yes, I am in favour of this.

[nemnem]

I am in favour of this as well. If someone is going to have sex without a condom they're going to have sex without a condom regardless of whether or not they have had the jab. If we can't prevent STD's then we should at least try to cut the rate of teenage pregnancy. At the end of the day STD's affect only the person who has done it, but if they get pregnant and decide to keep it there is a child involved as well.

[FTC199]

in the areas they are talking about, teenage pregnancy rates are incredibly high as the teenagers there do not always receive much sex ed either from their schools (also lots of truancy in these areas) and from their parents. They also often dont have thoughts about further education or training and the fact that having children can affect these. I think it could be a good thing as it would decrease the number of teenage mothers and also increase the job prospects for a lot of females in these areas as they are less likely to get pregnant and so do not need ot spend their time looking after young children

[death.drop]

Originally Posted by ElvisAint-Dead

Having the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe is better than having the highest rates of stds'.

i disagree, I think it's better for people to have kids when they're more mature and prepared.
At least with stds it's only the people who are unsafe that suffer, rather than babies that don't ask to be conceived.

I think it's a good idea, but it should really be combined with better sex education; giving people more awareness of what risks they're taking and focusing on the emotional side of things.

[Magnanimity]

What the hell, no one should be shagging at 13. Shouldn't they be trying to discourage this sort of behaviour?

There'll be STD's everywhere

[Pigeon Explosion]

We need better sex education first and foremost.

[Renal]

Thirteen year-old girls can, do and will get themselves up the duff. This is not the solution, but it can be part of one.

[Renal]

Originally Posted by junglemonkey

There'll be STD's everywhere

How many of your punters have herpes?

[Magnanimity]

Originally Posted by Renal

How many of your punters have herpes?

I don't examine genitals?

[nemnem]

Originally Posted by junglemonkey

What the hell, no one should be shagging at 13. Shouldn't they be trying to discourage this sort of behaviour?

There'll be STD's everywhere

And how do you propose we do that?
Realistically we are never going to be able to stop young teenagers having sex, in actual fact I think the problem is going to get progressively worse. So for the time being it makes sense to accept that it's going to happen and try and do something about the consequences instead

[Magnanimity]

Originally Posted by nemnem

And how do you propose we do that?
Realistically we are never going to be able to stop young teenagers having sex, in actual fact I think the problem is going to get progressively worse. So for the time being it makes sense to accept that it's going to happen and try and do something about the consequences instead

Parenting.

[nemnem]

Originally Posted by junglemonkey

Parenting.

but if we don't stop the teenagers getting pregnant then they will have more children and raise their children bad and they in turn will have more bad children young and the problem will go on forever!!! haha, we need to stop them breeding!

[Renal]

Originally Posted by junglemonkey

I don't examine genitals?

You examine mouths, and you know the ratio of HSV 1 to 2.

[rlw31]

Originally Posted by Renal

Thirteen year-old girls can, do and will get themselves up the duff. This is not the solution, but it can be part of one.

Really, girls get themselves pregnant, I'm pretty sure males have something to do with the process.

[Renal]

Originally Posted by nemnem

haha, we need to stop them breeding!

Excellent idea. I'll get the medroxyprogesterone.

[anyarian]

Originally Posted by ElvisAint-Dead

[url]In my opinion i think that its a bad idea as it will result in even more teenagers having under age sex since they know that they won't get pregnant, it will cause a huge spread of sexualy transmitted diseases and might even cause an increase in the number of people with aids. Having the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe is better than having the highest rates of stds'.

Spoiler:

500th Post!

doubt it. they about condoms, and where to get them. if they want to have safe sex, they'll already be doing it. this'll just mean that the ones who can't be bothered to get condoms/get "carried away" and have sex without planning it/ get drunk and have unprotected sex won't get pregnant.

[ElvisAint-Dead]

Originally Posted by death.drop

i disagree, I think it's better for people to have kids when they're more mature and prepared.
At least with stds it's only the people who are unsafe that suffer, rather than babies that don't ask to be conceived.

I think it's a good idea, but it should really be combined with better sex education; giving people more awareness of what risks they're taking and focusing on the emotional side of things.

I doubt that they will have good sex ed classes which will discourage teenagers from having underage sex and to use protection. I think a large number of teenagers won't bother using protection. If loads of them know very well that you can get pregnant from having sex without contraceptives but still do it anyway then some of them won't care about using protection. It might lead to an increase in aids.

But i see what you mean.

[anyarian]

Originally Posted by Pigeon Explosion

We need better sex education first and foremost.

i don;t think that'll help much. my old school had really good sex ed/contraception ed. yet some of the year 8s were still having sex. and there were been 4 pregnancies in the time i was there.