Over the past 30 old ages. rubber distribution has non efficaciously helped against sexually transmitted diseases ( STD ) or adolescent gestations because rubbers are used falsely or non at all. The inquiry remains: does it promote teens to prosecute in sex by forcing rubbers in their custodies? We will research the effectivity of the plan. taxpayer positions. and spiritual positions. The theory by and large accepted in warranting the distribution of rubbers to adolescents is that this will protect them against gestation and STDs. However. in all honestness passing out rubbers to adolescents is a prescription for catastrophe.
Condom use to control gestation and STDs may be misunderstood by making a false sense of security in people whose behavior continues to set them in danger. “We can non state people how much protection rubbers give. ” said Dr. Malcolm Potts. one of the discoverers or preventives lubricated with spermicide and president of Family Health International. a non-profit-making prophylactic research group in North Carolina. ”I’m ever amazed that we know the atomic construction of the AIDS virus but don’t know much about rubbers. ” Seriously. if one of the discoverers of rubbers is saying he is non certain how effectual they are. so why promote the usage through the rubber distribution plans in schools? [ ( Grunson ) ] The premise should non be that all adolescents are desiring or ready to be sexually active. “Schools send a absurd message when they teach childs non to hold sex but so give them condoms” [ ( Limbaugh ) ] . The solution is non merely holding a basket of rubbers sitting in the nurse’s office. The condom distribution plan encourages sexual activity and fosters the thought that prenuptial sex is acceptable.
While many people don’t back up the rubber distribution plan. it is still being used. even with a really limited success rate due to the inability to guarantee teens are utilizing rubbers all the clip. In a 1988 study conducted throughout the United States. 27 per centum of low income. ne’er been married teens that relied on rubbers became pregnant due to inconsistent rubber usage [ ( JD ) ] . In a more personal instance. that of Cyntria Webber. the handiness of rubbers did non forestall her from holding sex without a rubber and going pregnant. Cyntria is quoted as stating. “I merely wasn’t believing about birth control at the clip. ” Harmonizing to the same beginning neither was the male parent of her kid [ ( Natale ) ] .
A major job with the condom distribution plan is teens non utilizing rubbers systematically or right. Harmonizing to Natale. “A rubber gives you the bravery to acquire in the backseat. but you don’t utilize it one time you get back at that place. ” If consistent and right usage of rubbers could be established among teens. so possibly the rubber plan would bring forth better consequences. But as we know. this is non the instance. A survey taken at San Francisco’s Balboa High School showed black consequences for those desiring the condom distribution plan to win. Harmonizing to the January-February 1991 issue of Family Planning Positions: * The figure of pupils holding sex doubled.
* The schools’ overall gestation rate increased in gestation. * There was an addition in sexually transmitted diseases. When rubbers were distributed at Balboa High School. the consequences were the antonym of what the plan set out to make. The plan failed dreadfully ; the exposure to STDs and gestations doubled alternatively of diminishing. This plan was supposed to cut down one-year teenage births but alternatively they spiraled upward by one tierce. This figure didn’t include figure of teens who aborted their gestations. Even without those figures. the addition in births with a condom distribution plan intact is phenomenal [ ( JD ) ] . On June. 10th. 2011. Pope. Benedict XVI was ridiculed. even by the Catholics. for his statement. “We can non work out the job of AIDSs by administering rubbers. ” Regardless of statements over the morality of an individual’s usage of a rubber. there is no uncertainty about the Vatican’s certainty that the publicity of rubbers has been a failure in the conflict against AIDS [ ( Fink ) ] . The condom distribution plan in public schools offends people’s faiths.
But showing pupils with rubbers in a publically funded environment presents a possible offense to people from a assortment of faiths. Catholics and followings of other faiths who don’t believe in birth control find the evident encouragement of sexual activity an insult to their spiritual traditions. Assorted faiths are members of society. and those citizens have a right to voice their positions about condom distribution or machines in their schools. Schools are non the topographic point for rubber machines. merely as schools are non that topographic point for coffin nail machines or intoxicant bars. Many high school pupils besides have a job smoke and imbibing. but that does non intend schools should administer filtered coffin nails or have a designated driver plan. Certain activities. such as imbibing and smoke. are lawfully appropriate for grownups. Sexual activity should besides be recognized as an activity best reserved for mature grownups. Schools are even advancing safe sex to teens every bit immature as 14. A adolescent that immature should non be involved in sex at all.
The Obama disposal has launched a $ 110 million adolescent gestation bar attempt that will back up a scope of plans. including those that teach about the hazards of specific sexual activities. and the benefits of contraceptive method ; and others focus chiefly on promoting teens to detain sex. One of them is the Comprehensive Sex Education plan which promotes abstention from sex. acknowledges that many adolescents will go sexually active. and Teachs teens about contraceptive method and rubber usage. This includes treatments about abortion. STDs. and HIV. Researcher Douglas Kirby. of the National Campaign to End Teen and Unplanned Pregnancies. examined surveies of bar plans which had a strong experimental design and used appropriate analysis. Two tierces of the 48 comprehensive sex-ed plans studied had positive effects [ ( Stein ) ] .
Get existent. Taxpayers should non hold to back up plans that they find morally obnoxious. Widespread rubber distribution will set up sexual activity as the norm among immature teens. making peer force per unit area to take part in sex. The added enticement to prosecute in sexual activity that is “protected” will ensue in more adult females holding sex at a younger age. Supplying teens with rubbers really encourages the earlier oncoming of sexual activity. If teens believe they will be “safe” when utilizing a rubber. they are much likely to be deterred from prosecuting in unsafe and immoral behaviour.
Twenty old ages ago when I was 14. you had to acquire a permission faux pas signed to merely go to sex instruction category. But today teens can obtain rubbers. birth control. and gestation trials without parents’ consent. This is so incorrect: In fact it is disgusting! It should be left up to the parent to raise their kids and make up one’s mind what to let their kids to obtain. Adolescents don’t understand all the wellness hazards involved with sex. Condoms are non a panacea.
Today. everybody wants a miracle drug. some charming potion. but nil is 100 per centum effectual. That’s a construct people merely don’t understand. Even if you use rubbers. it doesn’t intend that you can kip with a new individual mundane without hazard. “The safe sex message merely isn’t true. ” said Dr. Bruce Voeller. who is carry oning research on the effectivity and the lastingness of rubbers. He added. “You’re still playing a sort of Russian roulette. Alternatively of holding six slugs in the chamber. you have one” [ ( Grunson ) ] . It’s a unsafe game that teens don’t think about during the heat of the minute.
Even with decennaries of seeking different plans to cut down statistics in adolescent STDs and unplanned gestations. an effectual attack is non seting rubbers in adolescent custodies. In fact. the condom distribution plan within schools has non prevented STDs or gestations ; it has done the antonym as shown by the addition in STDs and adolescent gestations. By supplying rubbers. schools offend people’s faiths and do taxpayers pay the disbursal of the plan. Even with the alleged good purposes this plan was supposed to hold. it’s turned a page in history and non in a positive manner. Safe sex is now referred to as safer sex ; nevertheless. in world. it’s non. Passing out rubbers is a band-aid on a immense job that keeps whirling out of control.
Plants Cited
Fink. John F. “AIDS and Condom Distrabution. ” The Archdiocese of Indianapolis Online. 10 Jun. 2011. Web hypertext transfer protocol: //archindy. org/ 08 Jul. 2011. Gruson. Lindsey. “Condoms: Experts Fear False Sense Of Security. ” The New York Times. 08 Jul. 2007. Web. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. nytimes. com/ 08 Jul. 2011. Hartigan. JD. “The black consequences of condom distribution plans. ” National Center for Biotechnology Information. 25 Mar. 1999. Web hypertext transfer protocol: //www. ncbi. nlm. National Institutes of Health. gov/ 08 Jul. 2011. Limbaugh. Rush H. Condoms: The New Diploma. Boston: Bedford Books. 1996. 428. Print. Natale. Jo Anna. “The Hot New World in Sex Ed. ” American School Board Journal ( 1995 ) : 18-25. Print. Stein. Rob. “Teen birth rate hits historic low. ” The Washington Post.
2 Feb. 2011 Web hypertext transfer protocol: //voices. washingtonpost. com/ 08 Jul. 2011.
