Ruth Institute Blog

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

-Einstein

Enh. The hit the important point, more education is needed. Our nation is over-all, pretty vague about a lot of sexual health concerns. (Ask the average woman on birth-control if they know taking an anti-biotic negates the birth-control pill, chances are, half won’t know that it does.) Some of this is because of our hold over of puritanical based omg-sex-is-evil and some of this is in part of our cultures need for instant gratification. Why learn the proper way when you can just wing it?

And of course, lower socioeconomic classes tend to have the least access to contraceptives, and as such higher abortion rates.

“Our nation is over-all, pretty vague about a lot of sexual health concerns. (Ask the average woman on birth-control if they know taking an anti-biotic negates the birth-control pill, chances are, half won’t know that it does.)”

Any woman prescribed the pill has been told this in their consult with the doctor when the prescription is written. How much more education is needed? Do the doctors need to stand on their heads while they say this?

“And of course, lower socioeconomic classes tend to have the least access to contraceptives, and as such higher abortion rates.”

Not in New York. “The city’s health department distributes a pocket-size guide showing teenagers where they can get low-cost or free contraception, information that is also available on the city’s 311 phone and Internet hotlines. New York City hands out three million free condoms every month at thousands of venues. The city even has its own brand of condoms, NYC Condoms.” Yet the high rate of abortions…

Further in the article is the REAL issue. “Erratic contraceptive use is often rooted in ambivalence about pregnancy. Another GI study found that nearly one in four women who were not trying to become pregnant said they would be very pleased if they found out they were pregnant.”

“As Rachel Jones, a GI senior research associate, put it to the New York Times, “[T]he high rate of unwed pregnancy and abortion among poor women is a sign of ambivalence. They are torn between the desire to have a baby and the realization that it would be hard to bring up a child as a single mother.””

Huh, that would make TRI’s commitment to the father and mother marrying and raising their children more important to these women. Go figure.

“How much more education is needed? Do the doctors need to stand on their heads while they say this?”

Personally, I found out from a co-worker who also works at a doctors office. The doctor went over risks like blood-clots, what increases risks, symptoms and when I should take the pill. (Also, technically pharmacists should also be giving out that information, especially if a woman is picking up anti-biotics)

“Huh, that would make TRI’s commitment to the father and mother marrying and raising their children more important to these women. Go figure.”

HUNH? Also, erratic contraceptive use isn’t just on the women, if the idea is women want babies and men don’t, because really, men can wear condoms. The best thing a man can do if he doesn’t want babies is wear a condom. And this is becoming less about proper contraceptive use and more about a break-down of communication. Also a reminder that having a child to try and keep a relationship together is really bad idea.

” Another GI study found that nearly one in four women who were not trying to become pregnant said they would be very pleased if they found out they were pregnant.””

While thats a fairly high number, unless that study has a breakdown of the types of relationships the women were in (there’s a big difference between a married woman of 5 years and a two weeks into being boyfriend-girlfriend) and socioeconomic level, it’s kinda bunk.

” The best thing a man can do if he doesn’t want babies is wear a condom.”

Or maybe just show some self-control and not have sex.

‘it’s kinda bunk.”

How would the breakdown on the types of relationships change 1 in 4 into “bunk”? 1 in 4 is still 1 in 4 whether married or seeing each other for 3 weeks. All this shows is that women might not be motivated to prevent pregnancy. Now, if the unmotivated women becomes pregnant by a man she has known for three weeks, she might consider abortion because he wasn’t ready for fatherhood. So lack of education on contraceptives isn’t the problem in this case. That is the point of the GI data.

@Deb

Well, not quite. If most of the women surveyed were in stable long-term relationships, ambivalence towards pregnancy would rise. Afterall, I’ve yet to meet a sane person whose not in a long term relationship that be cool with getting pregnant tomorrow. Get pregnant by a one night stand, freak out. Get pregnant by 5 year hubby, meh it was gonna happen eventually anyway. So, yeah, i think it matters.

And besides, 1 in 4 women being ambivalent towards pregnancy doesn’t account for all of abortion.

(and honestly, I don’t want the unmotivated women who are cool with getting knocked up with 3-week boyfriend to be having kids anyway, there’s no way that sort of person has the emotional and mental stability to be a decent parent)

“and honestly, I don’t want the unmotivated women who are cool with getting knocked up with 3-week boyfriend to be having kids anyway, there’s no way that sort of person has the emotional and mental stability to be a decent parent”

Wow. People can change and become good parents out of the worst situations (I’ve personally know the child of a one-night-stand being mothered outstandingly by her biological mother) … do we not even give the kid and the mom that chance? Didn’t I just read you slam someone here for “slut-shamming”? Isn’t that what you have just done calling a woman in this situation not fit to parent and wanting her to abort her child?

Furthermore, you haven’t addressed the fact that more education on contraceptives has not lowered the number of abortions over the last ten years. You are conceding with the above comment that you are OK with abortion being just a back-up contraceptive, because contraceptives fail. So much for safe and rare.

Instead of accepting that sex makes babies, people are contorting themselves in all sorts of ways to make contraceptives and the education on them the “holy grail”. So for 20 years we push contraceptives at the problem. If only there was “better access to contraceptives”, “more explicit information on the use of contraceptives” then people could have sex with no babies (cue choirs of angels). And yet, with all this, still the same result- unwanted pregnancies. When we keep trying the same thing and expect different results … insanity.

…….. And this mother you know was ambivalent about pregnancy before becoming pregnant?

And thats not slut-shaming. If a woman wants to sleep around fine, as long as she’s safe and honest, she’s most likely not hurting anyone. But if she’s “ambivalent” about pregnancy to the point of missing pills and not wearing condoms, she’s no longer being safe. And that I have a problem with. That kind of behavior is self-destructive, and shows a lack of concern for the well-being of others. Usually, not a good quality for a parent.

Actually I wish the procreative part of sex required a written portion.

As far as safe and rare, well, yeah that’s what I’d prefer. I’d rather have men and women human up and wear condoms or another effective form of birth control. And I think thats possible, but it requires a culture change, which I believe comes from a combination of comprehensive programs and encouraging parents to talk to their kids about sex.

It’s not like we have a national system where all students learn the same about contraceptives. Some schools still teach abstinence only. Red states have higher teenage pregnancy rates. I mean, our culture’s pretty much cool with people not wearing condoms during sex. That sentiment sure as heck doesn’t come from those of us pushing contraceptives.

“It’s not like we have a national system where all students learn the same about contraceptives.”

Yes, but in very blue New York City, which this article discusses, the condom/birth control availability and education is high and still a whopping 40% of pregnancies end in abortion. 60% of African American pregnancies end in abortion- this isn’t rare, this is routine!

“As far as safe and rare, well, yeah that’s what I’d prefer. I’d rather have men and women human up and wear condoms or another effective form of birth control. And I think thats possible, but it requires a culture change, which I believe comes from a combination of comprehensive programs and encouraging parents to talk to their kids about sex.”

How about a cultural change where we expect adults to be adults, and show self-control? How about a culture that understands that if you have sexual intercourse, you can become pregnant? No contraceptive is 100%, so if our culture understood that if two people are having intercourse, that a pregnancy is a NATURAL, possible, outcome; those same two people would be more judicious in their choices of whom and when they had sexual intercourse.

No amount of explicit instructions on how to put on a condom (which have 12% failure rate) will change the fact that sexual intercourse between a man and a woman has the possibility of a pregnancy. Until we wake up to this fact, we will continue to see teenage pregnancy (red states) or pregnancies ending in 40% abortion rates (blue states). Expecting a different outcome- insanity.

12%? If used incorrectly maybe. Properly used is closer to a 2% failure rate.

Keep in mind, I pointed out that we needed a culture change (I pointed out that our society/culture is fairly lax on using condoms, logically, thus pushing for more education and availability, are not cool with that), and quite honestly, self-control/personal responsibility would cover both people having sex less, and using birth control properly. (you know, every persons an individual, approaches and perceives sex differently, blah blah blah) This isn’t necessarily a one or the other situation.

I also suggested that parents talking to their teens about sex, and yes, using contraceptives. Part of the reason sex-ed has sprung up (pun somewhat intended) so much over the past generation is because, parents suck at talking to their kids about sex. This isn’t even a political divide, the average parent, regardless of their political leanings just doesn’t talk to their kid, (there’s that whole, higher teen pregnancy in red states and higher abortion in blue states thing) Thats something we need to get over.

“Part of the reason sex-ed has sprung up (pun somewhat intended) so much over the past generation is because, parents suck at talking to their kids about sex. ”

Do you mean now or always? If they have always “sucked” why wasn’t there a bigger problem with unmarried mothers 100 years ago? If now, why now? I mean, everything is about sex nowadays. A parent can’t have the TV on without the topic coming up. This is the most genital-gazing culture ever, so why now are the parents not talking about sex (in your opinion)? By the way, Mont D. Law cited a study that shows that over HALF of parents talk about sex with their children. An interesting thing in that study, though, is that mothers disproportionately talked to their children about sex. Fathers and sons were not talking about sex with each other at all.

Still, with all this talk about parents, sex-ed, and contraception, we are dancing around the insanity of focusing on sex-ed and contraception. As a culture, we have denied (through contraception) the truth that sexual intercourse between a man and a woman always has the natural possible outcome of children. No amount of shrink-wrapping and drugging sex is 100% free of the possible outcome of a pregnancy. By continuing to focus on condoms and birth control, we lend a recreational quality to it (yes even if the man and woman love each other) because we deny the power intercourse has to create a unique never-to be-created-again human being.

….Social conventions change over time. People married younger, and were expected to have more babies. Parents (tend to, from my personal experience with friends parents and family) assume that their kids will learn from school, church or other sources. My mother stressed the importance of birth control and using condoms. My cousins parents assumed she was alright because she was involved in church groups. She was pregnant twice before high school graduation was over.

“As a culture, we have denied (through contraception) the truth that sexual intercourse between a man and a woman always has the natural possible outcome of children. No amount of shrink-wrapping and drugging sex is 100% free of the possible outcome of a pregnancy”

(also, that study. Self-reported? “Oh, of course I talk to my child about sex, we went over everything” mostly likely equals “I spent 5 minutes telling them to not have sex ever”)

Guess what though, proper education would stress that. Lord knows my mom did. The idea of a “quick fix” is a problem with American culture in general, and that shows up in all classes, religious groups, and races. Taking contraceptives away isn’t going to lower birth unwanted births or STI infections (in fact, the opposite would happen). Why is it that our culture is so lax on proper use of birth control? From my experiences, it seems to be that they don’t think things through, or plan ahead well.

“Taking contraceptives away isn’t going to lower birth unwanted births or STI infections (in fact, the opposite would happen).”

Before widespread availability of contraceptives and the more recreational quality given to sexual intercourse there were only 4 known STIs, now there are over 200.

“The idea of a “quick fix” is a problem with American culture in general, and that shows up in all classes, religious groups, and races. ”

I never suggested that self-control and rewinding the constant genital-gazing of our culture would be quick. Neither did I suggest that using sex within marriage always open to the creation of new human life would make Utopia. I do suggest that it would lower unwed pregnancy and STD rates. Nothing will ever completely eliminate the problem of unwanted pregnancies or STDS. But remember, my point was that the sex-ed/explicit condom info was doing the same thing and expecting different results. Using sex as it should be used is doing something different and expecting different results.

“(also, that study. Self-reported? “Oh, of course I talk to my child about sex, we went over everything” mostly likely equals “I spent 5 minutes telling them to not have sex ever”)”

Why so jaded? Why do you distrust parents so much?

……Just because STI’s weren’t known doesn’t mean they didn’t exist. While some strains have mutated and split, most of them have probably been around for the last 100 years or so, but they haven’t been documented/recorded/mistaken for something else.

And to be fair, I’ve been pointing out instant gratification/need for a “quick fix” since the beginning of this discussion. THATS WHAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. Doing things the “proper way” would lead to our desired outcomes in a way best for the individual. (i.e some will confine sex to marriage, some will monitor their birth control and use it properly) In reality, there’s no reason why both more education and a bit of a culture change that promotes more responsibility towards the possibility of pregnancy and STI’s can’t work. If anything, there needs to be both. After all, all the education efforts in the world aren’t going to stick if the person goes home and is bombarded with messages that what they’ve learned is useless or wrong.

“Why so jaded? Why do you distrust parents so much?”

I work retail, and I’m working on my teachers cert.

The failure rate of condoms is around 12%. http://www.americanpregnancy.org/preventingpregnancy/malecondom.html

“Just because STI’s weren’t known doesn’t mean they didn’t exist. While some strains have mutated and split, most of them have probably been around for the last 100 years or so, but they haven’t been documented/recorded/mistaken for something else.”

Really? Microscopes have been around since the 18th century and the understanding of “germs” was around 100 years ago (and even more so in the 1960s when the rise in STIs began). If the doctors didn’t see any new STIs then they just weren’t there. Furthermore, the rate of infections (especially to women) has skyrocketed. The rate of chlamydia in women is 3 times that of men. 1 in 4 (1 in 4!) teenage girls has an STD. I understand that there were STDs (4 of them) 60 years ago, but 1 in 4 teenage girls were not infected with them.

http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/news/20071113/chlamydia-std-rates-soar-in-us
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940/ns/health-kids_and_parenting/t/teen-girls-has-sexually-transmitted-disease/

“And to be fair, I’ve been pointing out instant gratification/need for a “quick fix” since the beginning of this discussion. THATS WHAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. ”

Yes, but you have been arguing for more of the same. Quick or not, more education is more of the same thinking that has been around for 30+ years. In that time, we have many new STIs and an incredibly high rate of infection.

“I work retail, and I’m working on my teachers cert.”

Are you saying you are jaded from working retail? If so, I understand! Are you saying you distrust parents from working retail? Do you believe that you see an accurate cross-section of parents where you work to come to your conclusions (if this is the case)?

Are you saying that you distrust parents from your teacher certification courses? If so, from one teacher to another, this is bad news. As a teacher, you provide a service to the parents. I would argue that a vicious cycle of parents relying too much on teachers to raise their children and teachers allowing it has played a part in poorer parenting over the years. Good teachers cannot take the place of even mediocre parents.