Giving contraceptives to 11 year old girls?

arbilad · Head Chef

Giving contraceptives to 11 year old girls?

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

Besides the glaring and appalling moral issues, don't they know that the longer you take the pill, the higher your chances of developing ovarian cancer?

arbilad · Head Chef

Call me cynical, but for some reason I think it's more important to them to promote an immoral lifestyle than it is to worry about the health and welfare of these girls. For one thing, no contraceptives will protect them from the emotional and spiritual damage that being promiscuous at such a young age will bring. Nor will birth control pills protect from STDs.

Duke of Mirth · Profuse Pontificator

When I was 11, I wasn't even thinking about sex. Has the world gotten that sick? My daughter is almost 12 and has no interest in boys yet. I just can't get my head around 11 year olds having sex. But this will be very beneficial to child rapist teachers. No fear of getting that 11 year old pregnant when you are molesting them. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

arbilad · Head Chef

So, Jason, what would you say if your 12 year old daughter came to you and asked for some birth control pills?

arbilad · Head Chef

BTW, to answer the question myself (I don't have a daughter, but I'll change the scenario to the male perspective), if my son came to me and asked for condoms, I would first have an earnest discussion with him. I would explain the consequences of fornication. I would explain that just using condoms doesn't make it ok or safe. I would encourage him to seek advice from the Bishop. And if my son persisted in asking for condoms, I would flat out refuse him.

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Me too arbi. Good answer.

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

I think that's pretty much what I'd do. And depending on the situation, consider other things like homeschooling. And maybe locking her in her room til she's 30.

arbilad · Head Chef

There are people who say that they're gonna do it anyway, you might as well make sure they're safe. I think that's entirely false. If you've established a good relationship with your child, they're likely to listen to you, at least a bit. If you explain why you're against promiscuity and then back that up by not providing contraceptives, there's a good chance that they won't have sex. If you do provide contraceptives, there is a very good chance that they will.

Duke of Mirth · Profuse Pontificator

They're going to steal cars anyway so we should give out crash helmets when the crash after a highspeed chase.

With my own daughter I would ask the obvious, "Why?" Then explain our heavenly father's plan of happiness, eternal marriage, proclamation on the family, true happiness etc. If she still asked I would definitely refuse and explain that I could not help someone enter into a sinful lifestyle. If she decided to rebell and go do it anyway at age 12 I'd put her in one of those wilderness programs for troubled teens.

Organist · Senior Member

And when everyone's parents promote such a lifestyle, we will have far fewer problems. Better get started on missionary work. Until that time, there will be teenage sex.

11 years old seems to be the extreme example, so I'll just talk about teenagers in general. Most people in the United States are not LDS. Most are influenced by 5 hours a day of television, whose secret combination purpose is to promote a sexually promiscuous lifestyle. A 15 year old who gets pregnant by some jerk has ruined the rest of her life. She will likely not graduate high school, not go to college, not obtain an occupation because she has to rais her child, not be supported by the jerk, so will on welfare. She will likely not have familial support to help her, and her child growing up in a fatherless home will likely perpetuate poor choices and values. Or, she will have an abortion, which we all want to avoid. Or, she could place the child for adoption, but doesn't happen nearly enough to solve our current problem.

Even after just a few months in outpatient clinics, I see this over and over again. Therefore, I feel that those who have not taken on the covenants found in the Lord's Kingdom should have access to and use various forms of birth control. This is also why birth control is legally available to girls without parental consent in most states.

arbilad · Head Chef

Organist, even though not everyone is LDS, everyone has a choice as to what sort of lifestyle they will promote for their teenagers. Many religions do an admirable job of teaching their kids not to have sex - many members of abstinence groups are not LDS. So abstinence is possible for non-LDS.
By distributing contraceptives, a promiscuous lifestyle is encouraged. I would rather see abstinence taught. It's better for them spiritually, and is the best protection available from getting pregnant or getting an STD. Sure, they may not be LDS. But they are still our brothers and sisters, and I see no reason to promote promiscuity amongst them.
Abstinence before marriage and fidelity afterward used to be common in the US, even though LDS were a small percentage of the population. It is not an unreasonable expectation to want abstinence and the benefits thereof taught. I feel that it would go a long way towards restoring morals in our society.

Organist · Senior Member

But since that is not happening, isn't that ineffective? There is no massive push anywhere in the USA to promote morality, but there is an opposite push. Isn't it more effective to deal with reality than utopia?

Secondly, out-of-wedlock births are draining our social system (taxes), both in direct welfare costs and in the costs of a to society of generations raised without fathers.

Birth control won't perpetuate bad culture, is much cheaper, and deals with reality.

arbilad · Head Chef

Handing out free birth control doesn't deal with reality, it creates reality. It promotes an immoral lifestyle. I'd rather promote something else for my fellow brothers and sisters.
Abstinence has proven very effective over the years. It's the way things are currently being done that has been ineffective in dealing with teen pregnancy, STDs, etc. Have we eradicated teen pregnancy by handing out free contraceptives? Has handing out free condoms prevented us from reaching the level where one in four teen girls has an STD?
There was much fewer teen pregnancies in the 50s before the sexual revolution. STDs were nowhere near as common. It seems criminal to me to encourage an immoral lifestyle by handing out free contraceptives when the alternative is so much better for everyone.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

There was a family in a former ward of mine and the daughter asked her dad for birth control. He freaked out and said no. By the end of the summer she was pregnant and we were having that awkward "wedding" in the RS room. He said he regretted not giving it to her.

arbilad · Head Chef

I think his problem was freaking out. If he had been willing to discuss it calmly, there would have been a greater chance of deferring her. Like I said, if you have a calm discussion with them, there is a pretty good chance, if you've maintained a good relationship with your kid, that they will desist from fornication. However, there is a very good chance that they will become sexually active if you give it to them. And you might be facing a shotgun wedding anyway, since not many adolescents are going to be conscientious about using birth control in every case.

Organist · Senior Member

I agree that first line should be parents trying to influence their children in rightousness. That is best accomplished with both a mother and father who love their children.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

personally i think it is irresponsible and dangerous to promote birth control to young girls. Such things don't protect from STDs and giving young girls it as a way to help them, is in effect signing their death warrants.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I guess that's why there's so many pregnant teens in Utah. At least we're all agreed on our MO's.

arbilad · Head Chef

That's a non sequitur, Coco. There are so many pregnant teens in Utah because they're having sex, not because they haven't had access to contraceptives. Back when abstinence was the norm, there were many, many fewer teen pregnancies.
Let's examine the question in a little more depth, too. A lot of teen sex is unplanned. How many teens (of either gender) are going to bring along contraception, just in case? How many boys are going to want to use condoms?
Also, as far as I can tell, it's not a question of availability. Anyone can walk into a pharmacy and buy condoms. There also exist female condoms, so your average teenage girl could carry around contraception without even bothering to get a prescription for pills. Sure, they're kinda pricey. But I really don't think that cost is the issue. Girls will spend tons of money on makeup, clothes, etc just to look nice. If they were planning to be sexually active and really cared about their health, couldn't they use part of their spending money to pick up a condom or two, just in case? Maybe you know of a study correlating greater availability of free contraception with lower teen pregnancy rates, but, as far as I know, that's not the case
But even besides the availability issue, it's the message it sends. It's the same thing as telling a little boy that it's alright if he plays with fire as long as he knows where the extinguisher is.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

This is what the deal is. Mormon kids think if they're on birth control or pull out a condom, it's PLANNED and is a worse sin than just "oh, we got carried away and we're soooo sorry"

situation. It's all about repentance, dude. LDS kids don't think quite the same way as non-LDS kids.

arbilad · Head Chef

So, if the LDS way is unplanned fornication, how exactly is freely available contraceptives going to help? If you go to the school nurse and get a prescription for birth control pills, isn't that the same thing as planning it? I mean, unless they start mandating that all teenagers must carry it in their cars, it seems like teens who want to feel that it was unplanned are very likely to be carrying around contraception, freely available or not.

Dyany · Senior Member

I'm afraid I agree with Coco. If you reach a point where your child is asking you for contraception, you've pretty much already failed on the 'educating your child for abstinence' part. Pulling them aside and telling them how wrong it is by THAT point is going to do very little, if any, good, and may actually drive them away. To you it is an 'abstinence or nothing' choice, but not to your child, and since at this point it is your child's choice, you have to acknowledge the third 'most responsible under the circumstances' option. Me, I would be devastated if my child came to me asking for birth control. Because it would mean I failed. However, I would be glad that a) they trusted me enough to come to me and b) they are at least thinking SOMEWHAT responsibly, so after another abstinence talk and trying to make an appointment with the bishop for my child, I would try to make birth control available on the chance that they still decide to sin.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

So what's your point Coco? Do you honestly believe that kids who have birthcontrol are responsible enough to take it everyday? Heck, I've known grown-ups who are married who aren't that organized. It's ridiculous to expect kids to take it, and then train them on its use, and expect that it's gonna make a bleepity-bleep difference in the number of unwanted pregnancies...

But you just go ahead and blame the church for why teens don't take responsibility for their reproductive health... rolleyes

arbilad · Head Chef

So Dyany, you're saying that if your kid came to you and asked for clean needles so that she could shoot up heroin with less chance of getting AIDS, you'd provide them for her?
Providing contraceptives for a sexually active teen is a false sense of safety. For one, the failure rate of most contraceptive methods is appalling. Granted, that's due to incorrect use. But adolescents are probably the group most likely to use it incorrectly. And many methods provide no protection from STDs. You're actually putting them in greater danger, because now they think they're safe.
And again, I'd like to ask; do you really think that teens can't get contraception if you don't provide it for them? If a kid comes to a parent asking for contraception, she's really asking for approval.

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

Yeah, I'm sure every Mormon that had sex out of wedlock did so because their parents failed to mention that they shouldn't.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I agree with Dyany. Where you got I'm blaming the Church, ray, I don't know. Just some stupid members within it. It's one thing to have unmarried sex. Yes, that's a sin, etc. etc... But it's a WHOLE MUCH BIGGER deal when you have a baby. Like INFINITELY bigger. When you have unmarried sex you screw up yourself and probably give some of your loved ones anxiety over your eternal welfare. When you bring a baby into the world, you've affected that child, throughout their entire life, the child's other parent and grandparents for their entire life, the child's future spouse and their parents their entire life and also the child's own children - the ripples are hard to see sometimes.

And yeah, I'm with Dyany that by the time they ask you for contraception, they ain't virgins anymore. At least they are thinking "somewhat responsibly" is right! What is sitting them down and having "the talk" with them *again* going to really do at this point?

And the whole drug use with needles thing I see as a non sequitur.

I don't necessarily think when they ask for contraception they are asking for approval. I see it as asking you, the people they trust (or should - you'll notice this doesn't happen too much in Utah) for help. Help. You'd obviously rather them go to one of the easy corner stores and get condoms there rather than come to you for it...??? Is it easier to keep your head in the sand that way?

arbilad · Head Chef

And the whole drug use with needles thing I see as a non sequitur.

It's the same issue - your kid is engaged in a destructive behavior and asks you for help to make it safer. You can't get away from the question that easily.

I don't necessarily think when they ask for contraception they are asking for approval. I see it as asking you, the people they trust (or should - you'll notice this doesn't happen too much in Utah) for help. Help. You'd obviously rather them go to one of the easy corner stores and get condoms there rather than come to you for it...??? Is it easier to keep your head in the sand that way?
I wouldn't rather either way. And I'd hope I'm following my kid's life well enough to pick up on the clues that they are sexually active. But again you dodge the question. Why do you think they come to you for contraception instead of taking care of the issue themselves? Kids can get pretty much any contraceptive they want, frequently free. They can go to Planned Parenthood if they want pills. What does asking the parents provide that these other sources don't? Approval. That's the only thing that parents can provide that they can't get from other sources.
I don't even see them asking for contraceptives as "acting a bit more responsibly". They think that contraceptives make the activity they're engaging in safe. They don't.
I wish that I could express my views on this more clearly.

Dyany · Senior Member

You're perfectly clear, Arbi. It's just that Coco and I disagree. And a kid that's 'smart' enough to have sex isn't necessarily smart enough to know where to get contraception. And like I said, I would again TALK to my teen about the risks, consequences, dangers, downfalls, etc. But I won't then just sit back and say, 'I did my part, if they get in trouble it's their own fault and to hell with them.' I would make contraception AVAILABLE (not hand it to them with a 'go for it') because, like Coco said, SOME responsibility/safety is better than NONE.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I think kids don't go to Planned Parenthood because they don't know where it is, don't have a car to get there, don't know they give out contraceptives for free and in general have never given the organization much thought. I think it's much more likely that kids will get contraceptives from parents or friends or their friends' parents. It's confidential (doesn't Planned Parenthood call up your parents?) and no one would find out.

So, if you had a kid that came asking you for contraceptives, you'd decline and tell them the only way you approve of them not getting pregnant or diseased is to abstain, period? I think the only way that doesn't make you a hypocrite is if you've never used contraceptives in your marriage.

It seems my driving force in this is avoiding teen pregnancy at all costs and maybe some others are more driven by avoiding STDs at all costs...?

I also disagree with ray's assesment that teens are not or unable to use birth control properly so let's forget the whole idea.

I'm also curious about this philosophy that some espouse -- you'd rather see your child in a coffin than an unmarried non-virgin. How do you feel about that statement?

beefche · Profuse Pontificator

I'm jumping into this fray. On the one hand, I completely understand where coco and Dyany are coming from. They feel that once a child goes to a parent/teacher/whatever and ask for contraceptives, they have already either done the deed or are going to do the deed regardless of any lecture. However, I can also understand (and lean towards) arbi and ray's standpoint. It appears you are giving "permission" or "accepting" behavior that is destructive both spiritually and physically.

Here's my little bit of opinion. Teens don't know much about sex. Sure, they may know the mechanics (barely), but beyond the feelings, they don't know much. So, I agree they likely don't know where to go to get free birth control and don't know how to use it properly. Further, kids are embarrassed by the littlest things. Something like asking for birth control of an adult would be very embarrassing. I think it's likely they wouldn't go through that.

In talking with some friends who are non-LDS and see nothing wrong with pre-marital sex (they are adults, though), I realized that birth control is almost COMPLETELY left up to the woman. For a variety of reasons, but the most prevalent are 1. the guy doesn't like the feel of condoms and 2. due to the "heat of the moment" neither parnter thinks of condoms.

I suspect the same would be true for teens. If they are asking about birth control, they've already done the act or are likely past any lecture. That doesn't mean they can't be convinced by the Spirit from a caring parent to abstain.

I think the key here is that if we are only talking about the parents on THIS board, we have an advantage that most other parents don't have--the Spirit and revelation. You, as parents, have the right to the Spirit and His guidance if this situation arose. As such, I think minds should be open to a variety of possibilities that the Spirit may guide.

Just my

.

arbilad · Head Chef

The best way for teenagers to avoid pregnancy is just not to have sex. If they have already had sex, the best way to prevent it in the future is to help them to stop. Contraception is like a security blanket; it may feel good, but it only reduces the chance, it doesn't eliminate it.
Look at this study.
Amongst teens using the most popular birth control method, the pill, 14% of girls will be pregnant after two years of sexual activity. Think about that. That's roughly 1 in 7 girls. The only method listed there with an acceptable failure rate is abstinence. The only way you're not playing a game with your daughter's future is if you help her maintain or return to abstinence. If you provide your kid with contraceptives, you can say goodbye to any chance of them taking you seriously regarding chastity.
Granted, that same study shows that 96% of women will be pregnant after two years using no method of contraception. But other studies show that almost all sexually active women (about 98% I think it was) have used some form of contraception. It is available. They do know how to get it. They don't approval for the activity from their parents.
And don't worry about Planned Parenthood's confidentiality. They don't even report statutory rape cases that come to them, even though by law they are required to.

Duke of Mirth · Profuse Pontificator

I think the world gives a false impression of how well the contraceptives work. Two out of four of my kids were concieved while my wife was using the pill. That's pretty bad odds. And we're responsible adults not kids.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

arbilad wrote:

The best way for teenagers to avoid pregnancy is just not to have sex. If they have already had sex, the best way to prevent it in the future is to help them to stop. Contraception is like a security blanket; it may feel good, but it only reduces the chance, it doesn't eliminate it.
I totally agree with that.

Amongst teens using the most popular birth control method, the pill, 14% of girls will be pregnant after two years of sexual activity. Think about that. That's roughly 1 in 7 girls.
Which is better than 7 out of 7. But maybe that's just me and my belief that fornication is one problem, but a baby is an INFINITELY greater problem. Maybe that's cuz I'm female.

If you provide your kid with contraceptives, you can say goodbye to any chance of them taking you seriously regarding chastity.
Now this I believe is the whole disagreement, at least with regard to the original topic. You believe that if you let your kid have the 6 month birth control shot or patch or whatever in essence you're sending the message, Hey! We don't care about morals! Have at it! I think part of our parenting should include realizing when our abstainance lectures have fallen short and we need to do something to see that either our daughter's life is not *permenantly* changed for the worse (as far as options go) or our son is not strapped with child support for the next 18 years when he's trying to go to college or make a life for himself. Fornication is something you can repent of and move on with your life. You never move on from another human being.

Duke - that's almost hard to believe. Some of those pills have a 98% success rate when taken properly... two kids in one family? evileye

Duke of Mirth · Profuse Pontificator

Well number one and number three were both surprise babies. I know several others in the ward with similar stories on at least one kid. It's anecdotal but I think that 98% rate is over inflated.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Perhaps the sisters in the ward got together and had a secret plan... evileye

Dyany · Senior Member

Some people are VERY fertile, but anecdotal evidence doesn't mean that the pill only has a 50% success rate. It's overall success rate is actually around 97-99% when taken properly. However, it doesn't matter. You are using terrible logic to justify your position -- contraceptives aren't perfect, so they shouldn't be used. That's ridiculous.
IF you fail as a parent to properly teach abstinence
then IF your child decides to have sex you are already in a very bad way spiritually. However, you MUST acknowledge that some sort of birth control is better than none, and hopefully will avoid the next step. If your child uses birth control of some sort (preferably condoms, as they also decrease chances of STDs, but that doesn't seem to be the argument here) they are being slightly more responsible (though agreeably not as responsible as abstinence) than not.
Then IF your child gets pregnant, you will have to deal with that.

Each IF is less preferable than the last. And the plain and simple facts are 1) contraceptives DO work MOST of the time and 2) IF your child is having sex, it is preferable that they don't get pregnant.

Abstinence is best. If I succeed as a parent, my child will abstain. However, that's just unfortunately not always the route children take.

Abstinence>safe sex>pregnancy/STDs

Arbi, you have not said what you would do if you found out your child is having sex, aside from 'talking to them.' In the likely scenario that talking to them (at that point only; I think that talking to them WILL help before it reaches this point) did not help, what would you do? Lock them in their rooms? Kick them out of the house? Report them to the police in the possible case of statutory rape? I have in-laws that have done most of these things and it only drove the children in question deeper into sin and further from their parents. What would you do?

ETA: Man, Everybody else posts while I'm typing. I agree with Coco.

-- Edited by Dyany at 11:25, 2008-04-09

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

The best you can do is teach your child the Gospel, Heavenly Father's plan, and the standards they should live. I worry about you using the words "success" and "failure" so much. Every person has agency, including our children. In the end, yes, they will make their own choices. But if you've done all you can, that doesn't mean you've failed; it means they've made bad choices.

Dyany · Senior Member

Jen: it's true our kids have choices. And sometimes they make bad choices no matter what we do. But MOST of the time, 'if you bring up a child in the way he should go, he will not depart from it.' So, though it's hard to admit, most of the time our children screw up so much it's because WE screwed up as parents. That's not to say we'll be held 100% accountable, because we have unconquerable (in this life) weaknesses as well that are not our fault, but I think that to be true to ourselves we MUST acknowledge at least part of our responsibilities and failures. I'm not saying that if your child sleeps around you are a 100% failure. I'm saying that, in that area, you most likely failed at successfully teaching abstinence. The child might be a great hard worker and a very nice person, and in those ways you succeeded (and what parent doesn't take credit for the successes?). But we have to acknowledge that in some ways we fall short, even if we've done all we can. Teaches us to grow, even if we AREN'T held accountable.

Organist · Senior Member

Birth control is getting easier. First there was the pill, a daily dose of hormones to keep from ovulating. Second, there was the pill in a patch, which had to be reapplied weekly.

Now, there is a long term hormone injection with a slow release. The girl simply needs to have the injection once every three months.

Or, for those who don't want any hassle, there is the long term (5 year) IntraUterineContraceptive (IUC), Mirena, which costs $400 with a $100 fee for the physician to implant it, which becomes cost effective after about one year. It has a 1 in 1000 unintended pregnancy rate for the first year (according to their website). It is being highly advertised on TV right now, and many women are coming in asking for it.

-- Edited by Organist at 11:45, 2008-04-09

arbilad · Head Chef

Dyany, there are several logical fallacies in what you're saying.
First, you're asserting that if a child starts having sex, then it's the parent's failure. That may be the case, but it may not be. Even the best parents have problem children. You could have had the kindest, most spiritual discussions on abstinence possible with them, and they can still fail. They have their agency. The brethren have repeatedly stressed that do your best, but don't flog yourself if a kid still turns out wrong.
Second, you seem to feel that once a teenager starts having sex, she will continue to have sex no matter what you do. That is a fallacy. I forget where I found the figure, but most girls regret pre-marital sex afterwards. If she trusts you enough to come to you for contraception, then there is still a line of communication open. You can use that trust, build on her regret, and help her change her ways. You can also enlist the help of other trusted people in her life. If not, then she is pretty far gone.
And actually, I did say the entirety of what I would do if I had a daughter and she came to me asking for contraception. I would have a talk with her. I would encourage her to see her Bishop. And, if she persisted, I would flatly refuse to provide her with contraception. I have seen firsthand in people's lives that locking them in their room or such activities pushes them together. The exception would be statutory rape, in which case I would call the cops. If he's in jail, they're no longer having sex.
By giving your approval to the activity, by giving them contraceptives, you raise their chance of getting pregnant from effectively zero to 14%. Such a huge increase is incredibly irresponsible.
If you have a good relationship with your kid, and if you act in accordance with gospel principles, I have great faith that you can get them on the path back to abstinence.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Yes, people have their agency. We can point out what a great man Lehi was and how Laman and Lemuel went their own way in spite of him teaching them, visions, etc. I think there might be something lacking in the way *some* LDS parents in 2008 teach their kids about chastity. What is the common angle used? Besides you'll go to hell and I'd rather see you dead, there's also the scrambling an egg metaphor or the picked flower. To me, this seems to lend itself to an all-or-nothing attitude. If I can't be perfect, I'll just go to hell then. Reminds me of a friend I used to work with who was gay and ended up committing suicide. I also know girls that decided that if they ended up pregnant, they would rather commit suicide than face their parents. This was at BYU. My MIL was in a group at Church getting ready for a funeral or something, don't remember, but the conversation turned to so-and-so who's son had just been sent home from his mission for fornication. Another sister commented how dreadfully embarrassed she would be if that EVER happened to HER! Then said she'd rather see him die. My MIL couldn't believe what she was hearing.

I think the above examples, though not specific to the original topic, are all indicative of this pervasive attitude that has become "less effective" esp. in Utah LDS communities in the raising of our kids.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I wonder why guys put so much onus on the girl?

They're the ones that have no say in the matter. The girl can have an abortion if she wants. He has no say. The girl can place it for adoption. He has no say. The girl can strap him for 18 years of child support and he has no say. Seems to me if I were a guy I'd be a lot more careful than some.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

arbi- I don't think dyany's saying she gives her "approval." Would you rather they screwed around for a time and then pulled their head out or they screw around for a time, pull their head out and have a baby to deal with the rest of their (and your, cuz you're probably gonna raise it) life? Don't you see having a baby as many, many, many times a worse problem than fornication only?

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

I agree with Arbi. That's a really, really harsh judgment you're placing on parents there, Dyany- and a wide judgment at that. Absolute statements impress me about as much as overly harsh judgments do.

arbilad · Head Chef

Cocobeem wrote:

Yes, people have their agency. We can point out what a great man Lehi was and how Laman and Lemuel went their own way in spite of him teaching them, visions, etc. I think there might be something lacking in the way *some* LDS parents in 2008 teach their kids about chastity. What is the common angle used? Besides you'll go to hell and I'd rather see you dead, there's also the scrambling an egg metaphor or the picked flower. To me, this seems to lend itself to an all-or-nothing attitude. If I can't be perfect, I'll just go to hell then. Reminds me of a friend I used to work with who was gay and ended up committing suicide. I also know girls that decided that if they ended up pregnant, they would rather commit suicide than face their parents. This was at BYU. My MIL was in a group at Church getting ready for a funeral or something, don't remember, but the conversation turned to so-and-so who's son had just been sent home from his mission for fornication. Another sister commented how dreadfully embarrassed she would be if that EVER happened to HER! Then said she'd rather see him die. My MIL couldn't believe what she was hearing.

I think the above examples, though not specific to the original topic, are all indicative of this pervasive attitude that has become "less effective" esp. in Utah LDS communities in the raising of our kids.

Coco, if I ever find out that my son has been having sex (or my daughter, if I ever have one) the discussion will focus on the wonderful healing power of the gospel and how it can help them avoid a life of misery. I also don't agree with making a child perceive themselves as forever lessened, somehow. Some very good people were hooligans earlier in their lives.

arbilad · Head Chef

arbi- I don't think dyany's saying she gives her "approval."
And that's a large part of the disagreement between us, Coco. She may not intend to give her approval by providing contraception, but that is what is happening anyway. Teenagers are masters at justification.

Would you rather they screwed around for a time and then pulled their head out or they screw around for a time, pull their head out and have a baby to deal with the rest of their (and your, cuz you're probably gonna raise it) life? Don't you see having a baby as many, many, many times a worse problem than fornication only?
Having an out of wedlock kid is indeed very hard on everyone involved. Which is why I would suggest the best method of contraception - abstinence. The "they're going to do it anyway" myth is very deceptive, very pernicious, and very damaging. In most cases, if you use love and inspiration, you can help them repent. Do you know how rare teenage pregnancy used to be? Modern teenagers are no more horny and no more sexy than were teenagers 50 years ago. But back then abstinence was more popular. Sex did happen (I won't try to claim differently), but it was much rarer and tended not to be as habitual a thing, because it was more accepted that you could change their behavior. Nowadays we're taught that they're going to do it anyway, so we might as well make it safe. And we have many more teen pregnancies, destroyed lives, etc because we have accepted the lie that "they are going to do it anyway".

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

Cocobeem wrote:

Yes, people have their agency. We can point out what a great man Lehi was and how Laman and Lemuel went their own way in spite of him teaching them, visions, etc.

Lehi had to have been a wonderful man. He gave up everything (everything worldly he had, anyway) to bring up his children in the right way, and still lost those two.

The only perfect parent that has ever been is Heavenly Father. Because He chose to give us agency, He lost 1/3 of his children before the world even was, even though He is absolutely perfect. But I most certainly would not call Him a failure as a parent. Equating success with perfection is alarming to me, and wrong.

Dyany · Senior Member

I didn't make an absolute statement. I said that MOST of the time parents have some responsibility to bear. Not ALL of the time. I even added the extra niceness of saying that sometimes even if we screwed up, we may not be held accountable because it may be not all our fault that we screwed up (i.e., it may be beyond our abilities). But that doesn't mean we can't learn from it and improve for the next child. It's human nature to want to place blame somewhere other than ourselves. But the fact is that we are probably at least partially responsible.

And Arbi, did I read you right that you would rather lock a child in his or her room than give them contraceptives? Did you realize that locking a child in their room is often considered a form of child abuse and is therefore illegal? While you may have seen positive results from such punishment, such results are extremely rare and generally the opposite results occur. But from what I have gathered, you are willing to take that risk. Also, as I understand it, it is better that your child become a parent than the possibility that they have the perception of approval from you for their sexual activities. I'm not saying that's the ideal outcome or what you want to happen -- you want the child to learn the error of their ways and begin to abstain, which we all agree on -- but if they DON'T abstain, it is better to have pregnancy than to have your perceived support of their activities. I understand.

I wish I had the graphical capabilities to make a flow chart and the research capabilities to show statistical probabilities for different scenarios. But I don't. So I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

It's my *hope* that they are NOT "going to do it anyway" and I really hope and pray none of us on this board will ever be in this situation. But the statistics are that we will, just as the statistics are that we will likely have one child go through a divorce. I guess I look at it like if they're having sex unmarried, yes, that's a tragedy and they will have serious consequences to endure on the road to repentance. But having a baby is a whole 'nother ballgame. That is something you will never move on from.

When the pioneers got pregnant, usually they just got married right away. Generally the man had to take the woman's word for who the father was and when the baby was due, etc.. Many people were marrying civilly before making the trip to the temple.

I guess I think once your kid is wanting contraceptives, you've got a whole different set of problems you're dealing with. You don't need to just hand them over, but you don't let the baby go with the bath water, either.

arbi said: But back then abstinence was more popular. Sex did happen (I won't try to claim differently), but it was much rarer and tended not to be as habitual a thing, because it was more accepted that you could change their behavior.

So you're saying that the pioneers accepted that change in one's behavior was more likely? That once they started having sex, they stopped ... stopped more than we do today? What do you think has changed since pioneer times to cause this mindshift?