Terminalcoffee discussion

36 views
Rants / Debates (Serious) > What should happen in sex ed class, and when??

Comments Showing 1-50 of 55 (55 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by RandomAnthony (last edited Sep 16, 2010 07:18AM) (new)

RandomAnthony | 14536 comments Check this out in the Huffington Post...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09...

What should happen in sex ed? At what age should sex ed take place, or do you see a longer continuum? Some people say schools shouldn't address sex ed at all. What do you think?

(In the TC sex ed class, we take a banana off of Kevin's fruit hat and put a condom on it.)


message 2: by Jim (new)

Jim | 6485 comments You would probably need a banana and a couple of plums :-)


message 3: by Meels (last edited Sep 16, 2010 08:18AM) (new)

Meels (amelia) I had sex ed in middle school. By then kids are hearing plenty of half truths from their schoolmates anyway. It's wasn't super detailed, but gave you the puberty basics. Freshman year we split boys in one class, girls in another (which I thought for embarrassment purposes was helpful) and watched films about our bodies and self breast exams and such, then had discussions where we could ask the questions. I thought it was all very tasteful and good. They weren't handing out condom lollipops and cards for the local abortion clinic or anything, just dispelling some myths, reinforcing what was real and "normal"...that's a big thing for a 12-14 year old who isn't sure about what is happening to their body and if they're the only one.

Look, I know some folks think it's the parent's place to teach their kids about this stuff, and I agree. But, a lot of parents are remiss for whatever reason. My 12 year old sex talk from my mother was, "Oh, honey, one of these days you'll try it and you'll like it." My 16 year old sex talk was, "Honey, you can always come to me if you need to and I won't be mad, I'll be disappointed you were to stupid to use protection, but I won't be mad. I'll take you right down and get you an abortion and that'll be that." Uh, yeah. Well, I could never get an abortion, personally. I have issues. I'm not lecturing anyone else, I'm just saying I couldn't do it...so that pissed me off.

In my opinion, schools shouldn't HAVE to, but people are idiots, so they do. Get over it. If you don't like what your kids are hearing in sex ed, you better get off your lazy parent ass and talk to them about it! I mean REALLY talk to them about it!

I don't think it should start before middle school though.


message 4: by Phil (new)

Phil | 11694 comments We may have had sex ed, but I don't remember it.

I do remember a time in sixth grade when the girls went to watch a movie about the "changes" in their bodies. The boys watched a movie, too. It was about body odor, deodorant and how to tactfully tell a friend they stink.

We never got to play with rubbers or snicker at teachers trying to say "penis" and "vagina" without blushing.


message 5: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca White (rebecca_white) | 1028 comments I'm with Barb.
I went to high school in the late 70s and we got it all, and I'm glad, even though I was one of those kids determined (at that time) to stay a virgin till I got married. I never felt personally challenged or offended by anything being said. Information is necessary - it's part biology, part psychology and part sociology, and I don't even trust most parents to get the whole story right. I live in the Bible belt and most people have so many hang-ups they can barely tell their kids the basic facts. Unfortunately, the outcome of that is that I live in a state with "abstinence only" education, which I think ought to be illegal because it's essentially only exists because of the prominence of religion.

As to when, I think starting with identifying parts in third grade is fine. As they get older, bring in more details and the emotional/moral/social aspects.


message 6: by Phil (new)

Phil | 11694 comments We're one of those wacko families where our son always called his winkie a penis. We never called it a winkie or anything else like that.

Hoo-ha? hehehe


message 7: by Kevin (new)

Kevin  (ksprink) | 11469 comments sex ed class for me meant automatically staying after school with my head down on the desk after being sent to the hall during the original presentation for making "boooinng" noises


message 8: by Youndyc (new)

Youndyc | 1255 comments My opinion: sex ed should occur in school, timed to occur right around the age girls begin to have periods, which these days is about age 10. So, fifth grade sounds right. I think any curriculum I would be comfortable with would have to leave out anal sex. But other than the anal sex portion, I'd be comfortable with what Ontario was considering but was too squeamish to adopt. (That is not a criticism of Ontario, the topic seems to create this reaction everywhere.)


message 9: by Youndyc (new)

Youndyc | 1255 comments I must admit, I'm squeamish on that topic. I would not want to be answering any kid questions about it.


message 11: by Brittomart (last edited Sep 16, 2010 01:03PM) (new)

Brittomart Our sex ed was basically "don't have sex because boys only want to fuck you because that's what they like to do/you'll get pregnant/you'll get AIDS and/or you'll die."

And my mom basically said "Do we need to have the sex talk? Doesn't your school cover that?"


message 12: by R.C. (last edited Sep 17, 2010 10:04AM) (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Sex ed started in the 4th grade in my school. It was very rudimentary and just involved projected images of anatomy. I don't remember much beyond everyone laughing to the point of tears. They had to threaten to take recess away us to calm us down.

Sex ed might be a bit too early for elementary school, but human anatomy should be taught just about then, before puberty, so kids understand what's going on.

In middle school we got a cool spreadsheet that displayed the various forms of contraception and the statistical probability of getting someone pregnant. It was interesting to know that the pill, in conjunction with pulling out, was nearly as safe as abstaining all together. (This could explain the popular rise in "cum shots" in the porn industry.)

The problem with Sex Ed is the unrealistic premise: abstinence. I will agree that from religious and health perspectives, abstinence is a great idea. That being said, it is both unrealistic and irresponsible to teach that abstinence is the only way. Kids have sex. Period. Whether or not you fill their heads with archaic fears of fire and brimstone or dealing with a baby at 16, it does and will continue to occur.

The teachers that we had not only had never experienced the pleasures as sex, in so far as we could tell, but absolutely refused (wren't legally allowed) to answer questions about sex. Asinine.

Bring in people who has done it ( a male and a female), preferably at a younger age, and have them explain how awkward it is, etc. Have her talk about her constant fears afterward. Have him talk about the peer pressure from guys who never actually did the deed. Teach proper safe sex techniques and alternatives, but also stress the safest thing to do is wait until you are older.

Sure, this may create a slight up-tick in hymen extinction rates, but it will probably help drop teen pregnancy and STD rates too. You can't prevent it from happening and you can't prevent kids from taking risks. The best you can do is give them as much information and advice as possible and let them decide their own course.


message 13: by Dr. Detroit (new)

Dr. Detroit | 6031 comments Britt wrote: "And my mom basically said "Do we need to have the sex talk? Doesn't your school cover that?"
"


My parents never even broached the subject. In 4th grade, our gym teacher rolled out a slide presentation in the cafeteria for the boys (and a separate one for the girls) on sex ed and we just about died laughing. You see, we thought we knew everything there was to know on the subject, all information we'd swapped back and forth on the playground.

I'm still not sure how it all works.


message 14: by Phil (new)

Phil | 11694 comments Sex ed would be more useful if it taught proper oral techniques, erogenous zones, etc.


message 15: by Meels (new)

Meels (amelia) That's more of a college level course, Phil.


message 16: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Phil wrote: "Sex ed would be more useful if it taught proper oral techniques, erogenous zones, etc."

I think thats what they means when they say "hire professionals." Bring on the porn stars and escorts to teach the kids how it is done!


message 17: by Youndyc (new)

Youndyc | 1255 comments when I was younger, my church (a baptist one) gave a sex education presentation to all the youth (ages 12-18).

This whole discussion is starting to remind me of that Monty Python classroom scene on sex ed where the teacher starts having sex with a woman in front of the class and lectures on it. Remember that?


message 18: by Phil (new)

Phil | 11694 comments Porn stars have no idea how it's done. They're all show, no go.


message 19: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments BunWat wrote: "Dude, not all sex ed everywhere in the world starts from the premise of abstinence. Nor does everyone agree that that from religious and health perspectives abstinence is a great idea. That may be your experience in your school but its very far from being a universal experience. "

Forgive me, as I think a good portion of Sex Ed programs in the states are abstinence based and thats where my perspective comes from.

I would raise an objection to your statement that from a health perspective that abstinence may not be agreed upon as the right course. While it is not an effective strategy to prevent sex, there is no benefit to teens having sex from a health standpoint. Add in the possibility of STD's and that dreaded parasite called a fetus, and I would postulate that a majority of health professionals would say the risks outweigh the benefits of orgasms and bragging rights. I could be wrong, as I am not a doctor, but common sense would factor in at some point.


message 20: by Dr. Detroit (new)

Dr. Detroit | 6031 comments Youndyc wrote: "when I was younger, my church (a baptist one) gave a sex education presentation to all the youth (ages 12-18).

This whole discussion is starting to remind me of that Monty Python classroom scene..."


See Message 13.


message 21: by Youndyc (new)

Youndyc | 1255 comments I rarely click the links for video.


message 22: by Phil (new)

Phil | 11694 comments There is a health benefit to having sex. I saw the results from a recent study showing that men who ejaculate more regularly also live longer.

My guess is that their lives are more enjoyable than those of the men who abstain.


message 23: by Phil (new)

Phil | 11694 comments The money shot is stupid. That's the part of porn that is totally demeaning. "Hey, why don't you pull out and cum on her face?" Yeah, that shows that you value your partner.


message 24: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Barb wrote: "I'm very sorry if that was meant to be a serious statment, but it drew and AFLOL (actual-factual LOL) from me. "

That whole paragraph was meant as humor. Glad you caught on and laughed.


message 25: by Brittomart (new)

Brittomart If I made a "When did you first discover the orgasm?" thread, would anyone post in it?


message 26: by Cynthia (new)

Cynthia Paschen | 7137 comments R. C. wrote: "BunWat wrote: "Dude, not all sex ed everywhere in the world starts from the premise of abstinence. Nor does everyone agree that that from religious and health perspectives abstinence is a great id..."

R.C., Under President George W. Bush, the only sex ed that was funded was abstinece-based. Luckily, they figured out that teaching horny teenagers about abstinence, rather than birth control, results in more unwanted pregnancies and more Sexually transmitted diseases.

Currently funding for sex ed is not Abstinence-based. Thank God. Effective pregnancy prevention programs usually involve some sort of role-playing involving the realities of parenting. In early days, they had kids carry an egg around. Now, they bring teen moms in to talk about their life.

The Baby Think it Over dolls have been quite effective, particularly the ones programmed to act like crack babies. The dolls shake and cry ALL THE TIME. That's enough to make most teenagers think twice about unprotected sex.


message 27: by Phoenix (new)

Phoenix (phoenixapb) | 1619 comments I have an open dialog with my kids about sex. I had to start talking to my daughter about sex when she was in the 1st grade because her classmates were talking about it, same thing with my son except he was in 3rd grade. I figured a good time to start talking to them was when the subject was brought up by their peers. I've had a lot of parents tell me that they are uncomfortable talking to their kids about sex and I just don't understand why. I want to be the one to educate my children about things like sex and drugs, that way I know they're getting the right information.


message 28: by Cynthia (last edited Sep 17, 2010 12:57PM) (new)

Cynthia Paschen | 7137 comments We volunteered with a pediatric clinic in the Mississippi Delta. The schools were into "Just say no" at the time, so there were a group of nuns (some were sister-doctors with medical degrees) who would pass out birth control pills to any girl who wanted them. I'm pretty sure they had a big supply of condoms available to the boys as well.

We asked the nuns how their superiors felt about the birth control. They said, "the alternatives are all worse."


message 29: by Cynthia (new)

Cynthia Paschen | 7137 comments Really, the lack of sex education in this country is ridiculous. I was in college before I learned anything about birth control methods, all thanks to an R.N at my local Planned Parenthood. I have given money to Planned Parenthood every month for the last 30 years or so. I admire their work so much.

Can you tell this discussion is really getting my goat? I had better go start dinner. Doing something with artichoke hearts and scallops, maybe in puff pastry. Yum.


message 30: by Kevin (new)

Kevin  (ksprink) | 11469 comments here is why i promote abstinence: i know that much psychological damage (maybe more than physical) can develop from sexual relationships by young people. not even sure how to explain myself here but the intimacy of sex taken lightly can affect you for a lifetime.

i making any sense here?


message 31: by R.C. (last edited Sep 17, 2010 01:34PM) (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments BunWat wrote: "Abstinence isn't a strategy to prevent sex, effective or otherwise. Perhaps you meant teaching abstinence isn't an effective strategy to prevent sex. Abstinence is just not having sex, its not a strategy to prevent people from having it."

I think you have have put me into Devil's Advocate mode, but here goes...

1) I say Abstinence is a strategy, if in a basic sense of the word. Chastity would be the act of abstaining from sex, so abstinence must be the strategy, as it is being invoked to obtain a goal. It is pushed primarily by those conservative views, influenced primarily from Christians who think you violate God's will by getting off before marriage (although that Nun story by Cynthia is interesting. Since seeing sister act, I've always liked nuns...especially after reading Fool). If you take a sex educator who is based in an Abstinence program aside and ask her what her strategy is, she'll most likely say to keep kids from having sex. Ergo, abstinence.

2. Obviously sex isn't done for health benefits, rather it is done for experimentation, enjoyment, and to fulfill relational desires. I was merely attempting to disarm your assertion that health professionals wouldn't support abstinence. Also, you made me look up the word "forsooth." Fascinating choice, btw.

3. I take it you aren't a fan of the show House, M.D.? That joke was shamelessly plundered from an episode. Humor is a fickle thing.

4. I would actually argue that the primary benefits of sex are related to the orgasm; without it, we would have gone extinct long ago. People initially have sex because they are in lust with another person. It is their biological imperative to mate with him/her. Over time, that lust subsides and is either replaced with love or a new partner. When you are in the heat of lust, risks be dammed.

I wholly agree with your final statement (a big regret that I hold is not staying on campus to take part in the ritualistic practices of intercourses so that I too could lead a fulfilled life). Having a healthy and positive connection with your sexuality is a good thing, which is one reason why abstinence programs are such a failure. They make sex out to be some mysterious voodoo that could wreck your whole life until you get married; then it becomes a thing of beauty.

Kind of like auto insurance rates; once you turn 25, the driver gods bestow upon you the mystical gift of good driving, which is why your premiums abruptly drop.


message 32: by Cynthia (new)

Cynthia Paschen | 7137 comments Oh, Kevin I completely agree that sex at too young an age damages kids, both boys and girls. My high-school-aged brother was raped (by a college girl) when we was passed out at a frat party and it was quite damaging for him. But abstinence education would not prevent things like that from happening. In reality, abstinence ed. INCREASES the amount of sexual activity and INCREASES STDs and unplanned pregnancies. That is why it is not the preferred method any more.

In my opinion, the only place abstinence ed. really belongs is in the home and in the church. In those settings, I am fine with it. Not in schools.


message 33: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Kevin "El Liso Grande" wrote: "here is why i promote abstinence: i know that much psychological damage (maybe more than physical) can develop from sexual relationships by young people. not even sure how to explain myself here bu..."

Recent studies show (wish i had a link) that the brain may still be in adolescence-stage until the mid 20's, so I buy that whole-heartedly.


message 34: by Cynthia (new)

Cynthia Paschen | 7137 comments I was merely attempting to disarm your assertion that health professionals wouldn't support abstinence.

R.C.: Health Professional DO NOT support abstinence education. I am married to a pediatrician. He talks about sex with his patients all the time, and thankfully he doesn't always assume that his patients are heterosexual. His talks with teens are straightforward and appropriately graphic.


message 35: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Cynthia wrote: "R.C.: Health Professional DO NOT support abstinence education. I am married to a pediatricia..."

I never said health professionals would support abstinence education. I would be shocked if people like you husband thought that kids not having sex was a bad idea though.

"I would postulate that a majority of health professionals would say the risks outweigh the benefits of orgasms and bragging rights" was in regards to the act of not having sex, not the abomination that is abstinence based Sex Ed.


Stacia (the 2010 club) (stacia_r) Kevin "El Liso Grande" wrote: "here is why i promote abstinence: i know that much psychological damage (maybe more than physical) can develop from sexual relationships by young people. not even sure how to explain myself here bu..."

Yes. Unfortunately, it's hard to sell it to your kids. My mom preached abstinence to all 3 of her kids (we were all raised in the Christian faith), and all 3 of them had kids before marriage (I had my first as a teenager).

My husband and I teach both abstinence and protection, which sounds contradictory, but it's really not.

We teach our kids why they should choose abstinence, and use our own lives as examples of why it's hard to raise children outside of marriage. We also give spiritual reasons for why this is a good choice as well.

But, along with that, we also have the practical talk. The "I'm not stupid and know you're horny" talk. My oldest is a teen and he knows why we'd prefer abstinence, but we've also told him that if he's going to make that choice to be out there doing it, he needs to consider the effect that him getting a girl pregnant or contracting a disease would have - not only on himself, but on the rest of the people that care about him.

I don't want to be a grandma now, and I sure as heck don't want to bury my children before me.

I feel that it is possible to teach both abstinence and how to protect yourself. In the Christian community, there's always this knee-jerk reaction to teach abstinence only, and while in theory that would be great, it doesn't always keep your kids from experimenting. It is possible to stress to your kids within your belief system what you feel is right/wrong, while still giving them the "but in case you end up in this situation..." talk.

My mom never wanted me to drink in high school either, and NEVER would have condoned it, but I knew that if I ever put myself in that situation, she would have come and picked me up from a party if it meant that I wouldn't drive while drinking.

Kids don't always make the choices that you want them to make, so the best you can do is help cushion them along the way.


message 37: by Kevin (new)

Kevin  (ksprink) | 11469 comments agreed stacia. i am not unrealistic or in a fantasy world in regards to abstinence. shoot, i couldn't do it myself. but i do know the problems both physical and emotional that are associated sex as an adolescent.


message 38: by Stacia (the 2010 club) (last edited Sep 17, 2010 01:43PM) (new)

Stacia (the 2010 club) (stacia_r) Plus, it doesn't help that the oldest kid knows that momma was getting it on quite a bit before marriage.

I was a wild child.

*edit* gotta love writing a post right as someone else is posting and yours has nothing to do with what was just posted.


message 39: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Kevin "El Liso Grande" wrote: "i know that much psychological damage (maybe more than physical) can develop from sexual relationships by young people. "

Also, I once dated a girl that I liked a lot, was in lust with, and who's virginity I was eventually given. After that, she became super clingy and borderline obsessed with me. It also turned us both into sex fiends for probably the next 8 months and turned a focus on being friends to just getting off. We tried to right the course eventually, but I think her issues with sex contributed to the eventual downfall of the relationship. There needs to be a level of maturity on both sides. That can't be stressed enough.


message 40: by R.C. (last edited Sep 17, 2010 02:03PM) (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments BunWat wrote: "RC, your number one is incoherent.

Chastity is not the act of abstaining from sex. Abstinence is the act of abstaining from sex - or really from anything..."


That is correct, you can abstain from a number of things, including food, sex, exercise, etc. But I must disagree with your definition of Chastity, as I believe you are confusing the two. En garde!

I will defer to the ever wise and benevolent being. The being that most resembles God, per definition of said deity: Google. Doing a quick "Define:Chastity" search return the following definitions:

-abstaining from sexual relations (as because of religious vows)

-virtue: morality with respect to sexual relations

-Chastity is sexual behavior of a man or woman acceptable to the ethical norms and guidelines of a culture, civilization, or religion.

-Chastity is the first soundtrack album by American singer-actess Cher, released on June 1969 by Atco. It was released to promote and accompany the 1969 motion picture, Chastity. The album was a commercial failure.

I could list them further, but the same themes are involved: sex and Cher.

Now, you could describe someone who abstains from things as being chaste. Por exemplo: David was a recovering alcoholic who's body was now chaste from the effect of that vile drink.

I very much disagree with you that Chastity can be used to describe anything beyond the act of not engaging in sexual activities, unless it is used in the hands of a creative writer. Even then, there would be much better choices to use.


message 41: by Phoenix (new)

Phoenix (phoenixapb) | 1619 comments I agree that the emotional and physical consequenses should be taught. I did find it harder to explain the emotional stuff than the physical though. Thankfully my daughter asked a lot of really good questions and it was much easier to answer specific questions than to try and sum up something so complex.


message 42: by R.C. (last edited Sep 17, 2010 02:28PM) (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Lol. I think we are stuck in an endless wheel :)

celibacy - Celibacy is defined as the lifestyle of someone who is, and is striving to remain, unmarried all his/her life. It is also used to describe a state of life where one chooses to abstain from all sexual activities (also known as "continence"

Chastity - abstaining from sexual relations (as because of religious vows)

Abstinence - act or practice of refraining from indulging an appetite

I think we could nitpick all day with definition and neither of us would budge, as witnessed with the definition I pulled from Google for Chastity, and the definition you pulled using the same search.

Lets just settle for the common accepted variety:

Abstinence - choosing to abstain from an act until you decide otherwise

Chastity - vowing to abstain from sex for an agreed upon time, such as until marriage, based upon society pressure

Celibacy - the act of vowing to never have sex per contract with God (insert catholic priest joke here)


message 43: by Phoenix (new)

Phoenix (phoenixapb) | 1619 comments BunWat wrote: "I mean a person who is in a committed relationship and gets an urge when their partner is out of town doesn't just go rushing out and jump someone because hey, I'm an adult, I'm allowed now. Its always part of sexual behavior to choose to refrain some of the time."

Oh how I wish this were true for a WHOLE lot more military wives...it made me sick to see how many of my "friends" did just that. Needless to say, we did not remain friends for long.


message 44: by smetchie (new)

smetchie | 4034 comments "I'm still not sure how it all works"

Oh Clark. My love for you is endless.


message 45: by Lobstergirl, el principe (new)

Lobstergirl | 24357 comments Mod
The word "abstinence" was never mentioned in my sex ed classes (6th grade). I doubt I knew what the word meant. Girls and boys were separated, then we saw very basic line drawings of human bodies (that still left a lot to the imagination), learned about periods, eggs, sperm. Our teacher was about 87, or she seemed so at the time.


message 46: by smetchie (new)

smetchie | 4034 comments I was at the table just next to a guy celebrating his 21st in a bar recently. After doing a shot of tequila, he attempted to vomit it back into the shot glass. I'd like to say I didn't nearly fall off my chair trying to stifle a giggle fit. I wish I'd been as understanding as the waitress who said "Aww. That's ok honey. Tequila will do that to you. It's happened to me before. Don't feel bad. I'm going to have to give you your check now, though."


message 47: by Lobstergirl, el principe (new)

Lobstergirl | 24357 comments Mod
Phil wrote: "There is a health benefit to having sex. I saw the results from a recent study showing that men who ejaculate more regularly also live longer.
"


But not necessarily in Delaware, depending on who wins in November.


message 48: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments BunWat wrote: "RC, clearly you are entrenched and whatever I say you are just going to argue for the sake of arguing because conceding a point would be "losing." So I'll cut the gordian knot for ya. You are of course correct, entirely right of the rightness of the righteous, because everything you say shines with the intellectual light of a thousand Galileo's and the sun moves around the earth oh yes it does, how could I have doubted it for a moment. "

No need to be sarcastic/sardonic/whatever. The sun does not revolve around the earth, and linking my argument to such folly isn't constructive.

Justing pointing out the inconsistencies of your argument. You said "Chastity is not the act of abstaining from sex." Yet the first definition returned by Google's "define:" function stated the exact opposite: abstaining from sexual relations...


message 49: by Stacia (the 2010 club) (last edited Sep 17, 2010 03:19PM) (new)

Stacia (the 2010 club) (stacia_r) Not to derail from the debate, but at this point I think schools should teach the extensive health side of sex ed (diseases, pregnancy, condoms, how every form of sex can be dangerous from anal to oral, etc.) because a lot of parents just don't have that talk with their kids. I'm not sure how to handle the emotional side of this. It really should fall on the parents, but it often doesn't. Unfortunately, if you started talking to kids about the "feelings" side of it in school, parents would complain. There's always the option of making counseling available, but kids RARELY take advantage of it, either from embarrassment or lack of caring.

I think all my kid got in school was a generic reproductive talk and the banana condom thing, which doesn't really drive any point home.

One of my old high schools had close to half of their kids test positive for HIV a few years ago at a blood drive (granted, a lot of those kids probably donated blood to find out their status, so that doesn't necessarily represent the whole school), which shows me that there isn't enough being done to really stress just how serious the issue is.

I remember watching a tv interview with some teens a few years back, and was appalled that a lot of the kids didn't know that you could catch a disease through giving oral.


message 50: by R.C. (new)

R.C. (rc_kinkaid) | 56 comments Stacia, something else that would be beneficial would be the offering of free STD testing at schools at routine intervals. Maybe even as part of the course.

Some kids who should be tested might not because of costs or fear of their parents. Not everyone is in walking distance of a free clinic.


« previous 1
back to top