From: mrharri@jake.cc.wayne.edu (Marissa Harrison)
Subject: Re: Minors right of access to contraceptives?
Organization: Wayne State University, Detroit
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 19:27:34 GMT

In article <2531@keele.keele.ac.uk> csz55@seq1.keele.ac.uk (Christopher Wrigley) writes:
>
>I have a question which I believe is worthy of debate. Again it concerns
>both parents and their children in an age where teenage pregnancy is no
>longer our primary worry.
>
>The question is: Should minors have the same right of access to
>contraceptives as adults and should parents be notified if
>contraceptives are provided to their minor children?
>
>I watched a program last night (Heart of the Matter {UK only}), that
>asked many questions on both sides of the debate.  Both arguments
>seemed justified, however I see no solution for a compromise....
>Well perhaps I do, as I will no doubt infer as I write this post.
>
>In the light of recent commercials that are screened in the US, I
>believe it is claimed that one in every one hundred adults are now
>HIV+. I also understand that Britain in only about five years behind
>the US in terms of the AIDS epidemic.
>
>The program told of how schools were now giving out free condoms to
>children at school if they wanted them with the reassurance that their
>parents would not be informed. They also did not have to give any 
>reasons or explanations to the teachers for their use. Some parents
>were outraged at the board of educations decision to allow this at
>school and are presently fighting a court battle for the withdrawl of
>this implementation.
>
>The program cleverly weighed the argument equally on both sides.
>I have decided to quickly sketch a synopsis of each side for brevity
>and reduced reading time:
>
>A G A I N S T
>
>       i)  The Catholic religion does not allow sex before marriage
>  and believe their children should not be exposed to this.
>
>      ii)  The matter should be discussed _in_the_home and is not the
>  schools responsiblilty nor is it their right to address such issues
>  or practices in the school setting.
>
>     iii)  The school, operating in this way, is upholding the parents
>  constitutional right to exersise full control over their children.
>
>      iv)  Parents felt that the school was teaching the _opposite
>  ideals to children in contrast to the ideals encouraged in the home.
>
>       v)  Giving condoms to children _encourages more sexual activity.
>  It was felt the children would be more likely to abstain if the free
>  condom opportunity was not available.
>
>      vi)  Misuse of contraceptives. (reports of using them as
>  waterbombs and placing them on classroom doorhandles etc.)
>
>
>F O R
>       i)  Primary reason: Will encourage _safer sex and has already
>  shown a clear reduction of people contracting the virus in those areas
>  where the new system is in operation.
>
>      ii)  Supports other problems such as teenage pregnancy etc.
>
>     iii)  Response to against (i): The contraceptives are available if
>  the child _wants them, s/he is under no obligation to avail of the
>  opportunity -- it is between parent and child.
>
>  
>What do parents and kids believe is right?
>
>		Chris

There's no question in my mind that condomns should be offered.  Parents
should tell their children why they are bieng offered and still retain
their moral values (just because they're being offered doesn't mean the
child has to have sex, just because drugs are readily available doesn't
mean a child should become a junkie).  There's far too much at stake to
pretend that there is no AIDS epidemic.  

Marissa






>__
>Christopher  Wrigley           "Have not children the right to keep the
>University of Keele, England      secrets of their hearts from you?"
>JANET - csz55@uk.ac.keele           (Lindkvist - Strindbergs "Easter")
>BITNET - csz55%seq1.keele.ac.uk@ukacrl


From: poon@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Vivienne Poon)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 21:08:14 GMT
Subject: Re: Starting Kindergarten
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server