Children, schools, contraception, parents

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
The privacy law has been in effect in Washington since 1992. The in-school program is a state Medicaid program (funded by the state, and mostly, federal tax dollars). Where there's free money to be got, someone will figure out a way to create more of a demand for it. If your customers can't come to you (because, you know, they can't even drive yet) then you can just set up shop right where they are. Chief Sealth school began offering the devices and these services in 2010, so it's not like the parents are just now finding out about it.
 

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
And I can guarantee, these kids are NOT 11 and 12 year olds.

image20-770x330.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: cheri1122

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
And I can guarantee, these kids are NOT 11 and 12 year olds.
Not in that picture, but the law allows for any girl in the 6th grade or higher to have access to contraception.

A spokesperson for the Washington State Health Care Authority Take Charge program, which is targeted at girls and women of all ages who do not have health insurance, said that underage students are eligible for a 'full array of covered family planning services' at school-based clinics if their parents meet the program’s requirements'.

When asked specifically if a sixth grader could get an IUD implanted without parental consent, the spokesperson responded: "We encourage all Take Charge providers to offer long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) in their clinics. {beeeecuz that's where the money is} A young person does not need parental consent to obtain a LARC or any other contraceptive method. If the young person is not choosing abstinence, she would be able to select a LARC and have it inserted without parental consent."

The public outcry sparked by this, is, of course, mostly outside the state of Washington, since those inside Washington have known about it for 5 years.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
If 11 and 12 year old girls are to avoid having sex, it's up to their parents [and older sisters, aunts, if any] to make them understand why. But all parents aren't good ones, and even some good ones can't/won't talk about sex, and all kids don't listen anyhow.
We don't want them having sex until they ready, [different ages for everyone], for a lot of reasons, but the sad fact is that some still do. Even at age 11 and 12. Pretending it doesn't/won't/can't happen just leaves them to deal with STDs, or pregnancy, [or both], and how many feel comfortable telling the parents about that? How many babies are abandoned at birth, because a too young girl couldn't deal with it, and/or was terrified to tell Mom and Dad? [If there is a Dad - they're not always the most responsible parent of the two].
Keep pretending that all parents are responsible about informing their offspring about the reality of sex, and all teens [and preteens] will behave with good sense [when their hormones are raging] and we'll keep having 11 and 12 year olds having babies, and outbreaks of chlamydia in middle school, like the one that just hit Texas.
Keep pretending it's not what it is, because that's worked well so far, right? :banghead:
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Keep pretending that an IUD in an eleven year old girl, or anyone else, will work it's magic to prevent an STD, 'cause that's exactly what the program recommends for all girls looking for contraceptions (LARCs).
 

greasytshirt

Moderator
Staff member
Mechanic
Got some bad news, Leo. Please keep in mind that I'm just the messenger, not an illegal alien repeat offender.
Or a spammer.

Colorado’s Effort Against Teenage Pregnancies Is a Startling Success
I wouldn't be surprised if that program is defunded. Seems that some people believe that IUDs cause abortions rather than simply preventing pregnancy.

I think there's another underlying force at work. Some people believe that sex before marriage is a sin, and sex should result in pregnancy, so birth control of any type is an affront to God. This is perverse thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cheri1122

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
If 11 and 12 year old girls are to avoid having sex, it's up to their parents [and older sisters, aunts, if any] to make them understand why. But all parents aren't good ones, and even some good ones can't/won't talk about sex, and all kids don't listen anyhow.
We don't want them having sex until they ready, [different ages for everyone], for a lot of reasons, but the sad fact is that some still do. Even at age 11 and 12. Pretending it doesn't/won't/can't happen just leaves them to deal with STDs, or pregnancy, [or both], and how many feel comfortable telling the parents about that? How many babies are abandoned at birth, because a too young girl couldn't deal with it, and/or was terrified to tell Mom and Dad? [If there is a Dad - they're not always the most responsible parent of the two].
Keep pretending that all parents are responsible about informing their offspring about the reality of sex, and all teens [and preteens] will behave with good sense [when their hormones are raging] and we'll keep having 11 and 12 year olds having babies, and outbreaks of chlamydia in middle school, like the one that just hit Texas.
Keep pretending it's not what it is, because that's worked well so far, right? :banghead:

What does any of that have to do with parental notification? There might be one or two 11-12 year olds somewhere living secretly with no adult in residence but for the most part they have an adult authority at home. Unless a child has been taken from the family, and in that case there will be another guardian in place, how can anyone think the school has such authority without notification and permission? Good deflection though.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
They don't notify parents/guardians either?
Most states have laws in place where minors can get prescription contraception without parental notification. Texas and Utah are the two that explicitly prohibit minors from receiving prescription birth control devices unless the parent or guardian signs off on it. Texas also has one of the highest teen birth rates in the nation, and the by far the highest teen repeat birth rate. If minor teens in Texas receive contraception devices via Medicaid or other federal funds, then federal privacy laws prohibit parental notification, however, despite the state laws.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Keep pretending that an IUD in an eleven year old girl, or anyone else, will work it's magic to prevent an STD, 'cause that's exactly what the program recommends for all girls looking for contraceptions (LARCs).

Of course it doesn't prevent STDs, which any legit provider would tell them, even though pregnancy prevention is their reason for requesting the device. When info is withheld, or misstated, it's because the conservative right wing demands it, not because the provider is lax.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
What does any of that have to do with parental notification? There might be one or two 11-12 year olds somewhere living secretly with no adult in residence but for the most part they have an adult authority at home. Unless a child has been taken from the family, and in that case there will be another guardian in place, how can anyone think the school has such authority without notification and permission? Good deflection though.

The idea that all parents should be notified ignores the percentage of teens who don't believe it would have a reasonable outcome - and we're not talking getting grounded for awhile. We're talking actual physical harm to the teen.
The number of babies born [because the teen had no alternative] then dumped in the closest receptacle says that all parents are not as agreeable to the idea as Sarah Palin was. Some react with extreme prejudice, and who would know that better than their teenage kids?
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Oh please. You aren't gullible enough to think PP et al cares anything about anyone or anything other than all the money they make are you? When information is withheld or wrong it is every bit as likely either inadequacy on the part of the employee or indifference.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Got some bad news, Leo. Please keep in mind that I'm just the messenger, not an illegal alien repeat offender.
Or a spammer.

Colorado’s Effort Against Teenage Pregnancies Is a Startling Success

Wow: a program that proves effective against unwanted pregnancies, which improves the chances of getting out of poverty, and the teens don't know about it if their sex education classes won't tell them, and even if they do, the insurance often won't cover it.
How incredibly stupid.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Oh please. You aren't gullible enough to think PP et al cares anything about anyone or anything other than all the money they make are you? When information is withheld or wrong it is every bit as likely either inadequacy on the part of the employee or indifference.

Gullibility has nothing to do with it, Mr Clickbait believer. I was a client of PP for many years, because I found them to be more convenient, caring, affordable, informative, and welcoming than the high price private doctors I'd seen before. As did the hundreds of other women I met there, while getting contraceptives, PAP tests, mammograms, etc.
When information is withheld or wrong it's usually because the faith based provider has an agenda that doesn't include the truth. You only have to look at the billboards [with smiling babies] to know that, but if you did further, and look at what they actually teach in their programs, it's inescapable.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
When information is withheld or wrong it's usually because the faith based provider has an agenda that doesn't include the truth. You only have to look at the billboards [with smiling babies] to know that, but if you did further, and look at what they actually teach in their programs, it's inescapable.
But that's not what you said. You said, without any qualifying "usually," in there, much less anything about a "faith based provider" providing IUDs and other forms of contraceptives to teens, "When info is withheld, or misstated, it's because the conservative right wing demands it, not because the provider is lax." That statement says, unequivocally, that providers of contraceptive devices to teens are infallible, incapable of making a mistake.

Plus, in a conversation about giving 11 and 12 year old girls UIDs, you're the one who brought up STDs, as if giving an 11 year old an IUD is gonna prevent any "outbreaks of chlamydia in middle school."
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
But that's not what you said. You said, without any qualifying "usually," in there, much less anything about a "faith based provider" providing IUDs and other forms of contraceptives to teens, "When info is withheld, or misstated, it's because the conservative right wing demands it, not because the provider is lax." That statement says, unequivocally, that providers of contraceptive devices to teens are infallible, incapable of making a mistake.


I was referring not to those who provide the devices [clinic employees], but to those who provide the education about contraception [faith based groups, in most cases]. They are not the same people.
That was in reply to LDB's assertion that information misstated or withheld is every bit as likely inadequacy or indifference on the part of the employee. There is beaucoup evidence about the misinformation provided by faith based purveyors of sex education today, but employees of family planning clinics? Not very much at all.

Plus, in a conversation about giving 11 and 12 year old girls UIDs, you're the one who brought up STDs, as if giving an 11 year old an IUD is gonna prevent any "outbreaks of chlamydia in middle school."

Excuse me, but it was you who said "keep pretending an IUD will prevent an STD" as if the provider would hand it over with nary a word about what it does and does not do. Even as a full grown adult [and mother], when I got contraceptives from PP, they never failed to remind me that it's no protection against STDs. I do not believe they would neglect to mention that with a client who is much, much younger. They may "give an 11 year old an IUD", but you'd better believe they're giving information on STDs as well.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Excuse me, but it was you who said "keep pretending an IUD will prevent an STD" as if the provider would hand it over with nary a word about what it does and does not do. Even as a full grown adult [and mother], when I got contraceptives from PP, they never failed to remind me that it's no protection against STDs. I do not believe they would neglect to mention that with a client who is much, much younger. They may "give an 11 year old an IUD", but you'd better believe they're giving information on STDs as well.
The reason I said that was, it was a direct response to you saying, inthe context of giving 11 year olds IUDs, "Keep pretending that all parents are responsible about informing their offspring about the reality of sex, and all teens [and preteens] will behave with good sense [when their hormones are raging] and we'll keep having 11 and 12 year olds having babies, and outbreaks of chlamydia in middle school, like the one that just hit Texas."

Which was on the heels of you saying, in the context of giving 11 year olds IUDs, "We don't want them having sex until they ready, [different ages for everyone], for a lot of reasons, but the sad fact is that some still do. Even at age 11 and 12. Pretending it doesn't/won't/can't happen just leaves them to deal with STDs, or pregnancy, [or both], and how many feel comfortable telling the parents about that?"

So, in the context of giving 11 years olds IUDs, you keep mentioning both pregnancy and STDs as if an IUD can prevent both. You are excused. ;)
 
Top