Abstinence still works
Calgary Herald
Thursday, August 17, 2006
It should come as no surprise that a new study shows teaching kids abstinence results in them delaying their first sexual experience. The study of 662 Grade 6 and 7 kids in Philadelphia found that those taught abstinence were less likely to have engaged in sex two years later when researchers followed up than kids taught only about the mechanics of contraception.
That is likely because teaching abstinence is not merely a matter of waggling a chiding finger at kids and telling them to stay away from sex. It also involves discussions about respect for self and others, and about the values of waiting until marriage or a committed relationship.
Kids taught solely from a utilitarian point of view pick up the assumption from adults that they're going to do it anyway, so here's a condom and here's how you use it.
Sex is not elevated beyond the status of a purely physical act and does not come with taboos except that of protecting oneself from disease and pregnancy.
Educators need to realize that for best results, discussions of sex cannot be divorced from the issue of morality and self-respect.
© The Calgary Herald 2006
Solutions to Sexual Problems.
-
peace.salam
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:26 am
I applaud Brother KMaherAli for excellent posts. But I think that most succinct is in his first post, i.e. spiritual imbalance leads to a void and any temporary drug like habit can fill it and cause gradual degeneration.
However, the teenagers have a more difficult problem. They dont have the analytical skills to understand and refute the baits thrown at them. Children blame their parents for the disciplining that they ought to be thankful for. For example even adults have been unable to analyse the lies that media throws at them. I am sure that one day a lot of people will know that muslims never demolished the WTC towers. I have read the history of actual conspiracies well and understand the progression. How the land of Palestine was traded by England for the support jews would bring for England in WW1 from the entry of United States on their side.
I have particularly found great benefit from a book called the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion on how to abolish the temptation of sex, by understanding its origin. It is irrelevent to me if the protocols was a hoax or who ever wrote it. What is relevant to me is the fact that its a superb piece of psychology and understanding of human condition. And it was written by not one person but a committee because such a brilliant piece of analysis could not have been formulated by any individual and within a lifetime of experience. One needs several lifetimes of experience to synthesize that understanding.
Protocols preceeded the works of Freud, Marx, and possibly Darwin. It preceeded the Communist revolution as well as Benjamin Disraeli, the first Jewish Prime Minister of England.
Protocols has many brilliant ideas, but one is to use the unattainable idea of freedom as a bait to trap and mislead its adversaries. You can find it now freely on plenty of websites on the internet. It was a highly suppressed book and a must read for the development of analytical abilities, a strong antidote to the propaganda of sex. Still, it is reactionary attitude, but I think both fear of Satanic forces and the love of God are simultaneously needed to protect ourselves. The last Sura of Holy Quran embodies that fear of satanic forces (ie awareness and protection from it), "min sharr-i-l Waswasil Khannas".
As for masturbation, though not unlawful in Islam (if I am correct), any indulgence is bad, and very bad. Perhaps it is indication of too much unused energy, or some physical imbalance, or mismanagement of bodily and mental resources. Regular physical exercise and healthy jamatkhana life as many of our parents generation had conveniently in the muslim countries is an excellent shield.
On the issue of gay, wild animals inside yourself should be domesticated and can be domesticated.
However, the teenagers have a more difficult problem. They dont have the analytical skills to understand and refute the baits thrown at them. Children blame their parents for the disciplining that they ought to be thankful for. For example even adults have been unable to analyse the lies that media throws at them. I am sure that one day a lot of people will know that muslims never demolished the WTC towers. I have read the history of actual conspiracies well and understand the progression. How the land of Palestine was traded by England for the support jews would bring for England in WW1 from the entry of United States on their side.
I have particularly found great benefit from a book called the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion on how to abolish the temptation of sex, by understanding its origin. It is irrelevent to me if the protocols was a hoax or who ever wrote it. What is relevant to me is the fact that its a superb piece of psychology and understanding of human condition. And it was written by not one person but a committee because such a brilliant piece of analysis could not have been formulated by any individual and within a lifetime of experience. One needs several lifetimes of experience to synthesize that understanding.
Protocols preceeded the works of Freud, Marx, and possibly Darwin. It preceeded the Communist revolution as well as Benjamin Disraeli, the first Jewish Prime Minister of England.
Protocols has many brilliant ideas, but one is to use the unattainable idea of freedom as a bait to trap and mislead its adversaries. You can find it now freely on plenty of websites on the internet. It was a highly suppressed book and a must read for the development of analytical abilities, a strong antidote to the propaganda of sex. Still, it is reactionary attitude, but I think both fear of Satanic forces and the love of God are simultaneously needed to protect ourselves. The last Sura of Holy Quran embodies that fear of satanic forces (ie awareness and protection from it), "min sharr-i-l Waswasil Khannas".
As for masturbation, though not unlawful in Islam (if I am correct), any indulgence is bad, and very bad. Perhaps it is indication of too much unused energy, or some physical imbalance, or mismanagement of bodily and mental resources. Regular physical exercise and healthy jamatkhana life as many of our parents generation had conveniently in the muslim countries is an excellent shield.
On the issue of gay, wild animals inside yourself should be domesticated and can be domesticated.
-
BUIteacher23
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 7:13 pm
Purity balls
In praise of chastity
Nov 16th 2006 | VAN WERT, OHIO
From The Economist print edition
Staving off the evils of sex before marriage
“YOU'RE here to celebrate the idea of purity,” intones the pastor solemnly. “You find people in the sack all the time in the movies...But God has a better plan.”
Some 40 couples showed up at a country club in the tiny Ohio town of Van Wert on November 11th—not boyfriend and girlfriend but fathers and their school-age daughters, several as young as 10, dressed up in glittery gowns and heels.
After the pastor finishes, fathers and daughters sign pledges to help keep the girl chaste before marriage. Daughters agree to “remain sexually pure until the day I give myself as a wedding gift to my husband.” Then the father gives the daughter a ring, to be worn on her fourth finger until it is replaced by a wedding band. Hugs ensue, then a prayer, and then fathers and daughters take to the floor to the strains of “Have I Told You Lately That I Love You?”
Purity balls are one of the newest ways that Christians are trying to keep their children chaste and free of sexually-transmitted diseases. The first started seven years ago in Colorado Springs, a city that is home to the lately disgraced Reverend Ted Haggard. That event is now held at a five-star hotel. This month over 200 people attended.
The concept is spreading around the country. Van Wert got its ball after the pastor and his wife moved from Albuquerque, where they had run another such event. The Van Wert ball is now in its second year, and has inspired two other nearby towns to begin their own. In Colorado Springs, Lisa Wilson, the ball organiser, says she has sent information packs to groups in 21 states and four countries—New Zealand, Sweden, France and Canada. Sponsors, including Wal-Mart and McDonald's in Van Wert, sometimes help pick up the tab for the events.
But what about the boys? Surely they bear at least half of the blame for the scourge of pre-marital sex? In Colorado Springs, Ms Wilson and her husband have created a private “manhood celebration” for their 12-year-old son. He is handed an engraved sword and urged to “grow into the weight of manhood”, which includes purity. In Van Wert, ball-goers agree that there should be an event for the boys. Which, if indoctrination of the girls works, seems a reasonable idea. Otherwise the chaste will constantly be chased.
In praise of chastity
Nov 16th 2006 | VAN WERT, OHIO
From The Economist print edition
Staving off the evils of sex before marriage
“YOU'RE here to celebrate the idea of purity,” intones the pastor solemnly. “You find people in the sack all the time in the movies...But God has a better plan.”
Some 40 couples showed up at a country club in the tiny Ohio town of Van Wert on November 11th—not boyfriend and girlfriend but fathers and their school-age daughters, several as young as 10, dressed up in glittery gowns and heels.
After the pastor finishes, fathers and daughters sign pledges to help keep the girl chaste before marriage. Daughters agree to “remain sexually pure until the day I give myself as a wedding gift to my husband.” Then the father gives the daughter a ring, to be worn on her fourth finger until it is replaced by a wedding band. Hugs ensue, then a prayer, and then fathers and daughters take to the floor to the strains of “Have I Told You Lately That I Love You?”
Purity balls are one of the newest ways that Christians are trying to keep their children chaste and free of sexually-transmitted diseases. The first started seven years ago in Colorado Springs, a city that is home to the lately disgraced Reverend Ted Haggard. That event is now held at a five-star hotel. This month over 200 people attended.
The concept is spreading around the country. Van Wert got its ball after the pastor and his wife moved from Albuquerque, where they had run another such event. The Van Wert ball is now in its second year, and has inspired two other nearby towns to begin their own. In Colorado Springs, Lisa Wilson, the ball organiser, says she has sent information packs to groups in 21 states and four countries—New Zealand, Sweden, France and Canada. Sponsors, including Wal-Mart and McDonald's in Van Wert, sometimes help pick up the tab for the events.
But what about the boys? Surely they bear at least half of the blame for the scourge of pre-marital sex? In Colorado Springs, Ms Wilson and her husband have created a private “manhood celebration” for their 12-year-old son. He is handed an engraved sword and urged to “grow into the weight of manhood”, which includes purity. In Van Wert, ball-goers agree that there should be an event for the boys. Which, if indoctrination of the girls works, seems a reasonable idea. Otherwise the chaste will constantly be chased.
http://chinadaily.cn/world/2006-12/04/c ... 749801.htm
Muslim woman gives sex advice on Arab TV
(AP)
Updated: 2006-12-04 11:46
CAIRO, Egypt - Heba Kotb is a conservative Muslim, wears an Islamic head scarf, and goes on television once a week to talk - frankly and in great detail - about sex.
Muslim sexologist Heba Kotb, who on her weekly television show answers questions from Muslims across the Middle East about the most intimate bedroom issues with an openness that is shocking to some and revolutionary to others in a society where talking about sex remains taboo, speaks to an Associated Press reporter in Cairo, Egypt Thursday, Oct. 19, 2006. [AP]
On her show, "Big Talk," Kotb answers questions from Muslims all over the Middle East about the most intimate bedroom issues with an openness that is shocking and revolutionary in a society where discussing the subject is taboo.
"How do I talk about these issues? Very seriously," the Egyptian sexologist says. "I put on a mask-like face and make sure I speak in the right tone of voice."
She also does it by talking about sex in an Islamic light, arguing that the faith is in favor of pleasure for both men and women, with one important caveat - that it be only in the context of marriage.
"I'm very proud of my religion," Kotb told The Associated Press in an interview at Cairo University, where she teaches forensic medicine. "My studies revealed to me more and more how Islam was ahead in all sexual matters ... I discovered that Islam understood sex long before the rest of the world."
For example, Islam "stresses the importance of foreplay," Kotb said, and she often stresses to listeners that women should also enjoy sex.
Kotb's frankness is a hit in a region where sex education is minimal, male-female contact is often discouraged and talk on the subject is usually in hushed tones, allowing myths to circulate freely.
She lectured in Saudi Arabia and Yemen recently, where she said many men in the audience where shocked, while women - some with veiled faces - bombarded her with questions.
Kotb, 39 and married with three daughters, studied sexology with Maimonides University, a private school in Florida, and combined it with her own knowledge of her religion to produce a dissertation titled "Sexuality in Islam." She opened a sexology clinic in Cairo in 2002, wrote sex advice columns in newspapers, appeared on talk shows and answered questions on an Arabic Web site.
She started "Big Talk" on the independent Egyptian satellite channel El-Mehwar more than two months ago.
Much of her advice is straight biology - laying out facts rarely aired elsewhere. Nothing is too sensitive. She discusses sexual positions, female orgasm, oral sex (allowed, "since there is no religious text banning it"), even masturbation (frowned upon but at least preferable to unmarried or adulterous sex, which is "haram," meaning forbidden by religion).
She takes a strict Islamic line on homosexuality - she calls it a disease.
Along with doctors, she sometimes brings Islamic clerics onto her show, and many callers ask about the religion's rulings on sexual issues.
Because Islam trumps all else on her show, some complain that it's part of a general inclination in the Middle East to view everything through the prism of religion.
"After Islamic banks, Islamic fashion, Islamic TV channels, Islamic hairdressers, Islamic swimsuits, Islamic writers ... now Islamic sex? This is too much," protested feminist writer Mona Helmi in a column in the Egyptian pro-government weekly Rose el-Youssef.
"Sex is an emotional and human condition, not a religious or identity issue," she said.
Some complain that youngsters are watching the show.
"So now girls and boys have heard all about Heba's talk about sex ... that will let them know more than they should and will get them excited," Somia, a housewife, told AP as she watched "Big Talk," too embarrassed to give her full name.
Kotb says frankness is essential and believes 80 per cent of divorces in the Arab world are due to sexual problems brought on by ignorance and societal pressure, such as the idea that man must marry a virgin.
"Many women know nothing about their bodies, not to mention sex, and they were raised to believe sex is for men and a dirty thing," she says.
She gives sex education courses for unmarried youths with the consent of their parents, but in her consulting practice takes only married couples. She says she is booked up for two months with couples from across the Arab world.
"It's a beautiful thing what she is doing," said Abier El-Barbary, a psychotherapist and faculty member of American University in Cairo. "It's a long overdue topic tastefully done," she said.
Muslim woman gives sex advice on Arab TV
(AP)
Updated: 2006-12-04 11:46
CAIRO, Egypt - Heba Kotb is a conservative Muslim, wears an Islamic head scarf, and goes on television once a week to talk - frankly and in great detail - about sex.
Muslim sexologist Heba Kotb, who on her weekly television show answers questions from Muslims across the Middle East about the most intimate bedroom issues with an openness that is shocking to some and revolutionary to others in a society where talking about sex remains taboo, speaks to an Associated Press reporter in Cairo, Egypt Thursday, Oct. 19, 2006. [AP]
On her show, "Big Talk," Kotb answers questions from Muslims all over the Middle East about the most intimate bedroom issues with an openness that is shocking and revolutionary in a society where discussing the subject is taboo.
"How do I talk about these issues? Very seriously," the Egyptian sexologist says. "I put on a mask-like face and make sure I speak in the right tone of voice."
She also does it by talking about sex in an Islamic light, arguing that the faith is in favor of pleasure for both men and women, with one important caveat - that it be only in the context of marriage.
"I'm very proud of my religion," Kotb told The Associated Press in an interview at Cairo University, where she teaches forensic medicine. "My studies revealed to me more and more how Islam was ahead in all sexual matters ... I discovered that Islam understood sex long before the rest of the world."
For example, Islam "stresses the importance of foreplay," Kotb said, and she often stresses to listeners that women should also enjoy sex.
Kotb's frankness is a hit in a region where sex education is minimal, male-female contact is often discouraged and talk on the subject is usually in hushed tones, allowing myths to circulate freely.
She lectured in Saudi Arabia and Yemen recently, where she said many men in the audience where shocked, while women - some with veiled faces - bombarded her with questions.
Kotb, 39 and married with three daughters, studied sexology with Maimonides University, a private school in Florida, and combined it with her own knowledge of her religion to produce a dissertation titled "Sexuality in Islam." She opened a sexology clinic in Cairo in 2002, wrote sex advice columns in newspapers, appeared on talk shows and answered questions on an Arabic Web site.
She started "Big Talk" on the independent Egyptian satellite channel El-Mehwar more than two months ago.
Much of her advice is straight biology - laying out facts rarely aired elsewhere. Nothing is too sensitive. She discusses sexual positions, female orgasm, oral sex (allowed, "since there is no religious text banning it"), even masturbation (frowned upon but at least preferable to unmarried or adulterous sex, which is "haram," meaning forbidden by religion).
She takes a strict Islamic line on homosexuality - she calls it a disease.
Along with doctors, she sometimes brings Islamic clerics onto her show, and many callers ask about the religion's rulings on sexual issues.
Because Islam trumps all else on her show, some complain that it's part of a general inclination in the Middle East to view everything through the prism of religion.
"After Islamic banks, Islamic fashion, Islamic TV channels, Islamic hairdressers, Islamic swimsuits, Islamic writers ... now Islamic sex? This is too much," protested feminist writer Mona Helmi in a column in the Egyptian pro-government weekly Rose el-Youssef.
"Sex is an emotional and human condition, not a religious or identity issue," she said.
Some complain that youngsters are watching the show.
"So now girls and boys have heard all about Heba's talk about sex ... that will let them know more than they should and will get them excited," Somia, a housewife, told AP as she watched "Big Talk," too embarrassed to give her full name.
Kotb says frankness is essential and believes 80 per cent of divorces in the Arab world are due to sexual problems brought on by ignorance and societal pressure, such as the idea that man must marry a virgin.
"Many women know nothing about their bodies, not to mention sex, and they were raised to believe sex is for men and a dirty thing," she says.
She gives sex education courses for unmarried youths with the consent of their parents, but in her consulting practice takes only married couples. She says she is booked up for two months with couples from across the Arab world.
"It's a beautiful thing what she is doing," said Abier El-Barbary, a psychotherapist and faculty member of American University in Cairo. "It's a long overdue topic tastefully done," she said.
Vaccines don't alter values
Calgary Herald
Saturday, February 03, 2007
If researchers came up with a vaccine that, given in childhood, prevented men from developing prostate cancer or protected girls against breast cancer, there would be no doubt in anyone's mind that children should receive the shot.
There is no reason to take a different attitude toward Gardasil, the new vaccine that protects against four forms of sexually transmitted human papilloma virus that can cause cervical cancer.
The backlash against the vaccine stems from the virus's link with sexual activity, and the supposedly implicit assumption behind a mass vaccination program that all girls are suspected of being promiscuous until proven innocent.
That's nonsense. A woman who remains chaste until marriage can still contract the virus if her husband has had multiple sex partners before her. Nor will the vaccination make girls feel invincible and thus more likely to engage in risky behaviours. The moral teachings instilled in a person run deeper than that; vaccines do not alter values.
Hepatitis B can be picked up from contaminated needles used to inject illicit drugs. Hepatitis B vaccinations are now routine in schools, but nobody has ever suggested they spur children on to become heroin addicts.
Several U.S. states have mandated the Gardasil vaccine -- which is 95 per cent effective against the viruses that cause 70 per cent of cervical cancer -- be given to all girls by the time they enter Grade 6. Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization is also recommending mass vaccinations.
Pushback is coming from people who appear to believe that good girls don't get cervical cancer, with the tacit suggestion that if they do, it's their just due for not being as virtuous as they ought.
The kind of double standard that dictates women should be denied a vaccine that can potentially save their lives belongs in another century. Girls should no more be denied this vaccine than they should be denied protection from polio.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Governor orders girls to get vaccine
Herald News Services
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Bypassing the legislature, Republican Gov. Rick Perry signed an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.
By issuing an executive order, Perry apparently sidesteps opposition in the legislature from conservatives and parents' rights groups who fear such a requirement would condone premarital sex and interfere with the way parents raise their children.
Beginning in September 2008, girls entering Grade 6 -- generally girls ages 11 and 12 -- will have to get Gardasil, Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV.
Perry, a conservative Christian who opposes abortion and stem-cell research using embryonic cells, counts on the religious right for his political base. But he has said the cervical cancer vaccine is no different from the one that protects children against polio.
Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass state laws across the United States mandating Gardasil for girls.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Calgary Herald
Saturday, February 03, 2007
If researchers came up with a vaccine that, given in childhood, prevented men from developing prostate cancer or protected girls against breast cancer, there would be no doubt in anyone's mind that children should receive the shot.
There is no reason to take a different attitude toward Gardasil, the new vaccine that protects against four forms of sexually transmitted human papilloma virus that can cause cervical cancer.
The backlash against the vaccine stems from the virus's link with sexual activity, and the supposedly implicit assumption behind a mass vaccination program that all girls are suspected of being promiscuous until proven innocent.
That's nonsense. A woman who remains chaste until marriage can still contract the virus if her husband has had multiple sex partners before her. Nor will the vaccination make girls feel invincible and thus more likely to engage in risky behaviours. The moral teachings instilled in a person run deeper than that; vaccines do not alter values.
Hepatitis B can be picked up from contaminated needles used to inject illicit drugs. Hepatitis B vaccinations are now routine in schools, but nobody has ever suggested they spur children on to become heroin addicts.
Several U.S. states have mandated the Gardasil vaccine -- which is 95 per cent effective against the viruses that cause 70 per cent of cervical cancer -- be given to all girls by the time they enter Grade 6. Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization is also recommending mass vaccinations.
Pushback is coming from people who appear to believe that good girls don't get cervical cancer, with the tacit suggestion that if they do, it's their just due for not being as virtuous as they ought.
The kind of double standard that dictates women should be denied a vaccine that can potentially save their lives belongs in another century. Girls should no more be denied this vaccine than they should be denied protection from polio.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Governor orders girls to get vaccine
Herald News Services
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Bypassing the legislature, Republican Gov. Rick Perry signed an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.
By issuing an executive order, Perry apparently sidesteps opposition in the legislature from conservatives and parents' rights groups who fear such a requirement would condone premarital sex and interfere with the way parents raise their children.
Beginning in September 2008, girls entering Grade 6 -- generally girls ages 11 and 12 -- will have to get Gardasil, Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV.
Perry, a conservative Christian who opposes abortion and stem-cell research using embryonic cells, counts on the religious right for his political base. But he has said the cervical cancer vaccine is no different from the one that protects children against polio.
Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass state laws across the United States mandating Gardasil for girls.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
School girls may get cancer vaccine
Alberta studies controversial HPV program
Eva Ferguson
Calgary Herald; with files from Canwest News Services
Monday, February 05, 2007
Alberta Health and Wellness is looking at providing the public school system with a new vaccine to immunize girls against the virus that causes cervical cancer.
A final decision isn't expected for another year while the Canadian Immunization Committee examines the benefits and costs of offering the shot against the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV).
But local health experts are thrilled about the unprecedented introduction of a simple injection that stops a certain cancer.
"I'm really excited about this. This is a new vaccine that actually has the possibility to prevent a large proportion of a type of cancer," says Dr. Peter Tilley, a medical microbiologist for Alberta Health and Wellness's provincial lab in Calgary and program leader for sexually transmitted diseases.
"This has never happened before."
Last week the National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommended all girls and women aged nine to 26 should be vaccinated.
Tracy Welsh, public affairs officer for Alberta Health, says the province likes the idea of a vaccine and the fact that it can be preventative. But more information needs to come forward, including whether it's more beneficial to put funding into a vaccine or put more funding into education, awareness and screening programs.
"This vaccine will prevent two strains of HPV -- the two which cause 70 per cent of all cervical cancers," Welsh said.
"But our decision to publicly fund this has been put on hold," Welsh said, while the Canadian Immunization Committee weighs various factors.
She said that committee, which is separate from the national advisory group, is examining how exactly the vaccine affects cervical cancer rates, different characteristics of the vaccine, its effects on the public as well as operational requirements like funding and staffing a vaccination program.
Last week, Virginia lawmakers endorsed legislation requiring girls be vaccinated for HPV before going into Grade 6. At least a dozen other U.S. states are considering similar bills.
And Canada could soon see school-based HPV vaccination, says Dr. Shelley Deeks, senior medical specialist in the immunizations and respiratory infections division at the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Because Canada has been successful in other school-based immunization programs, like hepatitis B shots for Grade 5 students, support for an HPV shot could follow.
Officials with the Calgary Board of Education didn't want to comment on the vaccine until a final decision is made by Alberta Health.
But parents of girls were supportive of the idea.
"I'd be in favour of anything that prevents anyone from having to fight any type of cancer," said Dolores Van Lee Uwen, the mother of a 17-year-old girl, who sits on two parent councils at Terry Fox Elementary and James Fowler High School
"Why go through it if you don't have to?"
Jerry Berger-Martindale, spokeswoman for the Calgary Association of Parents and School Councils, says she's open to introducing the vaccination program in schools, particularly if it's proven to be safe and effective.
"It sounds sensible, like a really good long-term strategy."
Berger-Martindale, the mother of a high-school daughter, adds that introducing the vaccine could be an opportunity to educate parents and their daughters about sexually transmitted diseases. "The kids all think they're so immortal, especially the younger ones. They're the ones who often think they can get away with unprotected sex."
Studies suggest 10 to 29 per cent of women in Canada are infected with HPV, making it the most common sexually transmitted infection in Canada.
HPV causes almost all cervical cancers, killing an estimated 290,000 women worldwide, including about 400 in Canada, each year.
Still there may be controversy over the vaccine's introduction.
Tilley admits introducing a shot for girls as young as nine for a sexually transmitted disease means many parents may have to raise discussions about sex or HPV much earlier than they'd like.
That's one of several issues the Canadian committee may be considering, Tilley says.
And adding the vaccine to the hepatitis B shot that all Grade 5 students receive may ease some of the stigma surrounding HPV.
Van Lee Uwen says parents will always have the choice of whether they approve the shot for their daughters and whether they'll have a discussion about sexually transmitted viruses like HPV.
"Parents would still have the option to say yes or no, like they do with hep B already.
"Either way, it should be readily available to the public."
The high cost of the vaccine may also be a stumbling block.
Merck & Co. had its Gardasil vaccine approved in July. It's available privately through family doctors at $135 a shot.
Girls, however, must receive the injection three times for it to be effective, totalling a cost of $405 per patient.
Welsh says that's why the Canadian committee is weighing the cost of providing the shot against the cost of increased awareness and screening programs.
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Alberta studies controversial HPV program
Eva Ferguson
Calgary Herald; with files from Canwest News Services
Monday, February 05, 2007
Alberta Health and Wellness is looking at providing the public school system with a new vaccine to immunize girls against the virus that causes cervical cancer.
A final decision isn't expected for another year while the Canadian Immunization Committee examines the benefits and costs of offering the shot against the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV).
But local health experts are thrilled about the unprecedented introduction of a simple injection that stops a certain cancer.
"I'm really excited about this. This is a new vaccine that actually has the possibility to prevent a large proportion of a type of cancer," says Dr. Peter Tilley, a medical microbiologist for Alberta Health and Wellness's provincial lab in Calgary and program leader for sexually transmitted diseases.
"This has never happened before."
Last week the National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommended all girls and women aged nine to 26 should be vaccinated.
Tracy Welsh, public affairs officer for Alberta Health, says the province likes the idea of a vaccine and the fact that it can be preventative. But more information needs to come forward, including whether it's more beneficial to put funding into a vaccine or put more funding into education, awareness and screening programs.
"This vaccine will prevent two strains of HPV -- the two which cause 70 per cent of all cervical cancers," Welsh said.
"But our decision to publicly fund this has been put on hold," Welsh said, while the Canadian Immunization Committee weighs various factors.
She said that committee, which is separate from the national advisory group, is examining how exactly the vaccine affects cervical cancer rates, different characteristics of the vaccine, its effects on the public as well as operational requirements like funding and staffing a vaccination program.
Last week, Virginia lawmakers endorsed legislation requiring girls be vaccinated for HPV before going into Grade 6. At least a dozen other U.S. states are considering similar bills.
And Canada could soon see school-based HPV vaccination, says Dr. Shelley Deeks, senior medical specialist in the immunizations and respiratory infections division at the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Because Canada has been successful in other school-based immunization programs, like hepatitis B shots for Grade 5 students, support for an HPV shot could follow.
Officials with the Calgary Board of Education didn't want to comment on the vaccine until a final decision is made by Alberta Health.
But parents of girls were supportive of the idea.
"I'd be in favour of anything that prevents anyone from having to fight any type of cancer," said Dolores Van Lee Uwen, the mother of a 17-year-old girl, who sits on two parent councils at Terry Fox Elementary and James Fowler High School
"Why go through it if you don't have to?"
Jerry Berger-Martindale, spokeswoman for the Calgary Association of Parents and School Councils, says she's open to introducing the vaccination program in schools, particularly if it's proven to be safe and effective.
"It sounds sensible, like a really good long-term strategy."
Berger-Martindale, the mother of a high-school daughter, adds that introducing the vaccine could be an opportunity to educate parents and their daughters about sexually transmitted diseases. "The kids all think they're so immortal, especially the younger ones. They're the ones who often think they can get away with unprotected sex."
Studies suggest 10 to 29 per cent of women in Canada are infected with HPV, making it the most common sexually transmitted infection in Canada.
HPV causes almost all cervical cancers, killing an estimated 290,000 women worldwide, including about 400 in Canada, each year.
Still there may be controversy over the vaccine's introduction.
Tilley admits introducing a shot for girls as young as nine for a sexually transmitted disease means many parents may have to raise discussions about sex or HPV much earlier than they'd like.
That's one of several issues the Canadian committee may be considering, Tilley says.
And adding the vaccine to the hepatitis B shot that all Grade 5 students receive may ease some of the stigma surrounding HPV.
Van Lee Uwen says parents will always have the choice of whether they approve the shot for their daughters and whether they'll have a discussion about sexually transmitted viruses like HPV.
"Parents would still have the option to say yes or no, like they do with hep B already.
"Either way, it should be readily available to the public."
The high cost of the vaccine may also be a stumbling block.
Merck & Co. had its Gardasil vaccine approved in July. It's available privately through family doctors at $135 a shot.
Girls, however, must receive the injection three times for it to be effective, totalling a cost of $405 per patient.
Welsh says that's why the Canadian committee is weighing the cost of providing the shot against the cost of increased awareness and screening programs.
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Kids playing HIV roulette
Reckless sexual attitudes heighten risk for teens
Calgary Herald
Saturday, February 17, 2007
It's not working. Kids still are not getting the message about the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases, particularly HIV/AIDS.
Gonorrhea, syphilis and chlamydia are on the rise in Calgary, according to statistics from the Calgary Health Region. All three diseases have seen a jump in the number of cases, with chlamydia up 20 per cent in the first nine months of 2006 over the previous year, gonorrhea also with higher year-over-year numbers and syphilis staging a comeback.
Even more frightening is the perception among teenagers that AIDS is nothing to fear. Dr. Ron Read, medical leader of the Calgary Health Region's Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic says kids aren't motivated to use condoms because they view AIDS as a controllable disease.
This, despite the ocean of information in which these kids are swimming. There is no reason for them not to be informed, but either they don't understand the implications of what they're hearing, or thanks to a pernicious sense of adolescent invincibility, they think it won't happen to them and if it does, it's no big deal.
Information on AIDS is now given to kids as early as Grade 6. Alberta Learning's sex-ed curriculum, taught in required high school Career and Life Management classes, makes AIDS education a priority. Several videos available to high school teachers focus on AIDS prevention, transmission and treatment, as well as interviews with HIV patients who talk about how the disease has affected their lives.
Yet, teens continue to behave as if somehow, the existence of anti-retroviral drugs has mitigated AIDS' 100 per cent fatality rate by putting off the inevitable into what, from a teen perspective, must seem a very distant future -- by which time there'll probably be a cure anyway.
"Kids hear about people contracting it and lasting 15 years or longer -- and they wonder what the big deal is," says Susan Cress of AIDS Calgary. The average age of death from AIDS is 40 -- an unimaginably distant age for someone who's 15.
A 2003 national school sex survey revealed that half of Grade 9 students across Canada believed AIDS is curable. Forty-five Alberta schools backed away from the survey after then-learning minister Lyle Oberg declared he thought it could lead to promiscuity.
This type of attitude on the part of adults may be contributing to the problem. Adults can hide their heads in the sand and take a "see-no-evil" attitude toward teen behaviour, but that isn't going to stop the kids from having sex.
Far better to face facts and find ways to make sure kids stay safe, especially with scary stats floating about such as those from the Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, which show that in 2001, females between 15 and 29 had 45 per cent of the AIDS cases among Canadian women.
And according to AVERT, an international AIDS charity, as of June 2006, there were 1,252 cases of AIDS in Alberta, which is among the top four provinces responsible for 95 per cent of national cases (the other three are B.C., Ontario and Quebec).
AVERT estimates that of the 58,000 Canadians living with HIV/AIDS at the end of 2005, 30 per cent were unaware they had been infected, with 4,500 new cases occurring each year.
How do you reach kids who seem amazingly blase about all this grim information being fed them?
The message needs to be hammered home. Paramount, of course, is their own health, and protecting them from an always fatal disease. Preventing infection also has implications for the public health system. Alberta pays for some AIDS drugs, but the high costs of treating the opportunistic infections that come with the disease must be figured in as well.
Apart from abstinence, which is an unrealistic expectation, using condoms is the best way to prevent the spread of infection.
If kids are tuning out to this message in school, then let them hear it elsewhere: through online ads at such websites as kiwibox.com and nexopia, posters in high school washrooms, or maybe even cellphone advertising.
The message is a simple one: Use condoms -- your life depends upon it.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Reckless sexual attitudes heighten risk for teens
Calgary Herald
Saturday, February 17, 2007
It's not working. Kids still are not getting the message about the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases, particularly HIV/AIDS.
Gonorrhea, syphilis and chlamydia are on the rise in Calgary, according to statistics from the Calgary Health Region. All three diseases have seen a jump in the number of cases, with chlamydia up 20 per cent in the first nine months of 2006 over the previous year, gonorrhea also with higher year-over-year numbers and syphilis staging a comeback.
Even more frightening is the perception among teenagers that AIDS is nothing to fear. Dr. Ron Read, medical leader of the Calgary Health Region's Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic says kids aren't motivated to use condoms because they view AIDS as a controllable disease.
This, despite the ocean of information in which these kids are swimming. There is no reason for them not to be informed, but either they don't understand the implications of what they're hearing, or thanks to a pernicious sense of adolescent invincibility, they think it won't happen to them and if it does, it's no big deal.
Information on AIDS is now given to kids as early as Grade 6. Alberta Learning's sex-ed curriculum, taught in required high school Career and Life Management classes, makes AIDS education a priority. Several videos available to high school teachers focus on AIDS prevention, transmission and treatment, as well as interviews with HIV patients who talk about how the disease has affected their lives.
Yet, teens continue to behave as if somehow, the existence of anti-retroviral drugs has mitigated AIDS' 100 per cent fatality rate by putting off the inevitable into what, from a teen perspective, must seem a very distant future -- by which time there'll probably be a cure anyway.
"Kids hear about people contracting it and lasting 15 years or longer -- and they wonder what the big deal is," says Susan Cress of AIDS Calgary. The average age of death from AIDS is 40 -- an unimaginably distant age for someone who's 15.
A 2003 national school sex survey revealed that half of Grade 9 students across Canada believed AIDS is curable. Forty-five Alberta schools backed away from the survey after then-learning minister Lyle Oberg declared he thought it could lead to promiscuity.
This type of attitude on the part of adults may be contributing to the problem. Adults can hide their heads in the sand and take a "see-no-evil" attitude toward teen behaviour, but that isn't going to stop the kids from having sex.
Far better to face facts and find ways to make sure kids stay safe, especially with scary stats floating about such as those from the Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, which show that in 2001, females between 15 and 29 had 45 per cent of the AIDS cases among Canadian women.
And according to AVERT, an international AIDS charity, as of June 2006, there were 1,252 cases of AIDS in Alberta, which is among the top four provinces responsible for 95 per cent of national cases (the other three are B.C., Ontario and Quebec).
AVERT estimates that of the 58,000 Canadians living with HIV/AIDS at the end of 2005, 30 per cent were unaware they had been infected, with 4,500 new cases occurring each year.
How do you reach kids who seem amazingly blase about all this grim information being fed them?
The message needs to be hammered home. Paramount, of course, is their own health, and protecting them from an always fatal disease. Preventing infection also has implications for the public health system. Alberta pays for some AIDS drugs, but the high costs of treating the opportunistic infections that come with the disease must be figured in as well.
Apart from abstinence, which is an unrealistic expectation, using condoms is the best way to prevent the spread of infection.
If kids are tuning out to this message in school, then let them hear it elsewhere: through online ads at such websites as kiwibox.com and nexopia, posters in high school washrooms, or maybe even cellphone advertising.
The message is a simple one: Use condoms -- your life depends upon it.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Doctors running out of ways to treat gonorrhea
Bacterium now resistant to all antibiotics but one
Helen Branswell
The Canadian Press
Friday, April 13, 2007
The wily gonorrhea bacterium appears to be en route to vanquishing yet another class of antibiotics, leaving just one last weapon in the arsenal to fight this very common sexually transmitted disease.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control on Thursday urged American doctors to stop using all antibiotics in the fluoroquinolone class to treat gonorrhea, a decision prompted by rising rates of resistance among gonorrhea strains isolated in the United States and beyond.
Doctors should use antibiotics from the cephalosporin class, said Dr. John Douglas, noting this is the only class of drugs still effective against the infection. He also warned there are no new antibiotics in the pharmaceutical pipeline to fight gonorrhea.
"Clearly there is an urgent need for new, effective medicines to treat gonorrhea, as we are running out of options to treat this serious disease," said Douglas, director of the sexually transmitted disease division of the CDC's national centre for HIV-AIDS, viral hepatitis, STD and TB prevention.
Canadian health authorities haven't yet issued this guidance nationally. But this country is seeing the same phenomenon of rising fluoroquinolone resistance in gonorrhea, said Dr. Tom Wong, director of the Public Health Agency of Canada's community acquired infections division.
"It is alarming and it is bad news," Wong said from Ottawa. "The development of superbugs really is something to be concerned about, whether it is gonorrhea or some other bugs in Canada."
After chlamydia, gonorrhea is the second most common sexually transmitted disease in Canada, with roughly 9,000 confirmed infections in 2005. The most common complications of untreated gonorrhea are pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility in women, and sterility in men.
Since antibiotic-like drugs were introduced in the 1930s, gonorrhea has developed resistance to each new class used to fight it -- sulfa drugs, penicillin and tetracycline.
The Canadian national resistance rate to fluoroquinolone is slightly higher than the U.S. figure, reaching 15.7 per cent in 2005 compared to the 13.3 per cent the American agency found in the first half of 2006.
But the public health agency says the wide variation in the resistance problem across geographic regions suggests there are still parts of the country where fluoroquinolones can be effective.
Canadian treatment guidelines issued last year say physicians treating a patient with gonorrhea should check local resistance levels and take a travel history from the patient to get a sense of whether the infection was acquired locally or in another area where rates might be higher or lower.
Based on that information, doctors should decide whether to treat with fluoroquinolones or use a cephalosporin drug, Wong said.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Bacterium now resistant to all antibiotics but one
Helen Branswell
The Canadian Press
Friday, April 13, 2007
The wily gonorrhea bacterium appears to be en route to vanquishing yet another class of antibiotics, leaving just one last weapon in the arsenal to fight this very common sexually transmitted disease.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control on Thursday urged American doctors to stop using all antibiotics in the fluoroquinolone class to treat gonorrhea, a decision prompted by rising rates of resistance among gonorrhea strains isolated in the United States and beyond.
Doctors should use antibiotics from the cephalosporin class, said Dr. John Douglas, noting this is the only class of drugs still effective against the infection. He also warned there are no new antibiotics in the pharmaceutical pipeline to fight gonorrhea.
"Clearly there is an urgent need for new, effective medicines to treat gonorrhea, as we are running out of options to treat this serious disease," said Douglas, director of the sexually transmitted disease division of the CDC's national centre for HIV-AIDS, viral hepatitis, STD and TB prevention.
Canadian health authorities haven't yet issued this guidance nationally. But this country is seeing the same phenomenon of rising fluoroquinolone resistance in gonorrhea, said Dr. Tom Wong, director of the Public Health Agency of Canada's community acquired infections division.
"It is alarming and it is bad news," Wong said from Ottawa. "The development of superbugs really is something to be concerned about, whether it is gonorrhea or some other bugs in Canada."
After chlamydia, gonorrhea is the second most common sexually transmitted disease in Canada, with roughly 9,000 confirmed infections in 2005. The most common complications of untreated gonorrhea are pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility in women, and sterility in men.
Since antibiotic-like drugs were introduced in the 1930s, gonorrhea has developed resistance to each new class used to fight it -- sulfa drugs, penicillin and tetracycline.
The Canadian national resistance rate to fluoroquinolone is slightly higher than the U.S. figure, reaching 15.7 per cent in 2005 compared to the 13.3 per cent the American agency found in the first half of 2006.
But the public health agency says the wide variation in the resistance problem across geographic regions suggests there are still parts of the country where fluoroquinolones can be effective.
Canadian treatment guidelines issued last year say physicians treating a patient with gonorrhea should check local resistance levels and take a travel history from the patient to get a sense of whether the infection was acquired locally or in another area where rates might be higher or lower.
Based on that information, doctors should decide whether to treat with fluoroquinolones or use a cephalosporin drug, Wong said.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/op ... nted=print
May 19, 2007
Guest Columnist
Let's Talk About Sex
By ATUL GAWANDE
One statistic seems to me to give the lie to all the rhetoric about abortion, and it's this: one in three women under the age of 45 have an abortion during their lifetime. One in three. All politicians — Democrat and Republican — say they want to make abortion at least rare (as Giuliani did in Wednesday's debate). On, this they could reach agreement. But it's clear they haven't been serious; the U.S. has 1.3 million abortions a year.
Reducing unintended pregnancy is the key — half of pregnancies are unintended, and 4 in 10 of them end in abortion. For a while now, we've had solid evidence about how to effectively do this. But it requires getting specific about two subjects that are perilous in politics: sex and contraception. That, politicians won't do. So let me try to help with four facts everyone needs to know.
Fact one is that, with children, parents do matter. Reviews of multiple studies have shown that parents who maintain a close relationship with their teenage children, monitor them carefully, and send a certain message about sex actually do reduce unintended pregnancies. That message, when most effective, is neither permissive about sex nor focused only on abstinence, but instead combines two components. First, it emphasizes throughout high school that teenagers should wait until they're older to have sex (because the majority regret not waiting; because having a child as a child wrecks their lives); and second, it makes it clear that when they ultimately have sex, they should always use protection.
More children are, in fact, getting this message. Pregnancies at age 15 to 17 are down 35 percent since 1995, according to federal data; one-fourth of the drop is from delaying sex, and three-fourths is from increased use of contraceptives. Today, just 7 percent of abortions occur in minors.
Fact two follows from this: Abortion is mainly an adult problem. Forty-five percent of abortions occur in adults ages 18 to 24; 48 percent occur after age 25. Most are in women who have already had a child. The kids are all right. We are the issue.
Fact three is that our biggest problem is not using contraception properly: 92 percent of abortions occur in women who said they used birth control. Six in 10 used contraception the month they got pregnant. The others reported that they had used birth control previously but, for one reason or another, not that month. (Many, for example, say they didn't expect to have sex.) The trouble appears to be blindness to how easy it is to get pregnant and what it takes to make birth control really work.
Oral contraceptive pills, for example, are nearly 100 percent effective when used consistently. But in the real world, they fail 8 percent of the time — that is, 8 in 100 women on the pill get pregnant in a year. The lower dose hormone formulations used nowadays have fewer side effects, but missing a dose by even six hours puts a woman at serious risk. (One should add condoms for that whole month, experts say.) Miss two days and one is effectively not on birth control at all. Anyone prone to missing really needs to consider switching methods.
Birth control requires constancy, and most people overestimate how constant they can be. Fifteen percent of women who rely only on condoms get pregnant in a year, largely from inconsistency in using them. Withdrawal is even more dicey — it has a 25 percent failure rate.
The most effective methods are long-lasting: I.U.D.'s are safe and nearly 100 percent effective in actual practice. So is Implanon (the under-the-skin implant which replaced Norplant) and surgical contraception. But no method is perfect. Each has downsides — costs, risks, side effects. Every woman must weigh them. A few good Web sites have the details. WebMD is one, for example. But this is where you come to the last fact.
Fact four: you have to educate yourself. The details matter. An effective national campaign would provide the details — on television, on billboards — and actively use what evidence shows works best to cut our massive rate of unwanted pregnancies. But politics precludes this. There's not going to be such a campaign anytime soon.
Nonetheless, there's no reason you have to join the one in three — or as a male, contribute to it. You just have to understand: the effort is strictly Do-It-Yourself.
Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston and a New Yorker staff writer, is the author of the new book "Better." He is a guest columnist this month.
May 19, 2007
Guest Columnist
Let's Talk About Sex
By ATUL GAWANDE
One statistic seems to me to give the lie to all the rhetoric about abortion, and it's this: one in three women under the age of 45 have an abortion during their lifetime. One in three. All politicians — Democrat and Republican — say they want to make abortion at least rare (as Giuliani did in Wednesday's debate). On, this they could reach agreement. But it's clear they haven't been serious; the U.S. has 1.3 million abortions a year.
Reducing unintended pregnancy is the key — half of pregnancies are unintended, and 4 in 10 of them end in abortion. For a while now, we've had solid evidence about how to effectively do this. But it requires getting specific about two subjects that are perilous in politics: sex and contraception. That, politicians won't do. So let me try to help with four facts everyone needs to know.
Fact one is that, with children, parents do matter. Reviews of multiple studies have shown that parents who maintain a close relationship with their teenage children, monitor them carefully, and send a certain message about sex actually do reduce unintended pregnancies. That message, when most effective, is neither permissive about sex nor focused only on abstinence, but instead combines two components. First, it emphasizes throughout high school that teenagers should wait until they're older to have sex (because the majority regret not waiting; because having a child as a child wrecks their lives); and second, it makes it clear that when they ultimately have sex, they should always use protection.
More children are, in fact, getting this message. Pregnancies at age 15 to 17 are down 35 percent since 1995, according to federal data; one-fourth of the drop is from delaying sex, and three-fourths is from increased use of contraceptives. Today, just 7 percent of abortions occur in minors.
Fact two follows from this: Abortion is mainly an adult problem. Forty-five percent of abortions occur in adults ages 18 to 24; 48 percent occur after age 25. Most are in women who have already had a child. The kids are all right. We are the issue.
Fact three is that our biggest problem is not using contraception properly: 92 percent of abortions occur in women who said they used birth control. Six in 10 used contraception the month they got pregnant. The others reported that they had used birth control previously but, for one reason or another, not that month. (Many, for example, say they didn't expect to have sex.) The trouble appears to be blindness to how easy it is to get pregnant and what it takes to make birth control really work.
Oral contraceptive pills, for example, are nearly 100 percent effective when used consistently. But in the real world, they fail 8 percent of the time — that is, 8 in 100 women on the pill get pregnant in a year. The lower dose hormone formulations used nowadays have fewer side effects, but missing a dose by even six hours puts a woman at serious risk. (One should add condoms for that whole month, experts say.) Miss two days and one is effectively not on birth control at all. Anyone prone to missing really needs to consider switching methods.
Birth control requires constancy, and most people overestimate how constant they can be. Fifteen percent of women who rely only on condoms get pregnant in a year, largely from inconsistency in using them. Withdrawal is even more dicey — it has a 25 percent failure rate.
The most effective methods are long-lasting: I.U.D.'s are safe and nearly 100 percent effective in actual practice. So is Implanon (the under-the-skin implant which replaced Norplant) and surgical contraception. But no method is perfect. Each has downsides — costs, risks, side effects. Every woman must weigh them. A few good Web sites have the details. WebMD is one, for example. But this is where you come to the last fact.
Fact four: you have to educate yourself. The details matter. An effective national campaign would provide the details — on television, on billboards — and actively use what evidence shows works best to cut our massive rate of unwanted pregnancies. But politics precludes this. There's not going to be such a campaign anytime soon.
Nonetheless, there's no reason you have to join the one in three — or as a male, contribute to it. You just have to understand: the effort is strictly Do-It-Yourself.
Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston and a New Yorker staff writer, is the author of the new book "Better." He is a guest columnist this month.
<H1 style="MARGIN: 6pt 0in">Strong Religious Views Decrease Teens' Likelihood of Having Sex<SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></H1><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Teens — particularly girls — with strong religious views are less likely to have sex than are less religious teens, largely because their religious views lead them to view the consequences of having sex negatively. According to a recent analysis of the NICHD-funded Add Health Survey, religion reduces the likelihood of adolescents engaging in early sex by shaping their attitudes and beliefs about sexual activity. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">The study also found that parents' religious beliefs and attitudes toward sex did not directly influence teens' decisions to have sex. Rather, parents' attitudes toward sex seemed to influence their teens' own attitudes toward sex, and indirectly, their teens' behavior. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">When teens do have sex, their beliefs about the consequences of sexual activity become more permissive — meaning more positive or favorable — but their religious views do not change. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">In particular, adolescent girls who had sex reported that they were more positive about having sex in the future. However, the greatest predictor of whether teens would have sex — regardless of their religious views or attitudes — was whether or not they were dating. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Sexual intercourse places teens at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, and unintended pregnancy. The information provided by the study may prove important for health researchers and planners devising programs that help prevent teens from engaging in sexual activity. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">"A better understanding of why religious adolescents are less likely to engage in early sexual intercourse may help in designing prevention programs for this behavior," said Duane Alexander, M.D., Director of the NICHD.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></H1><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Teens — particularly girls — with strong religious views are less likely to have sex than are less religious teens, largely because their religious views lead them to view the consequences of having sex negatively. According to a recent analysis of the NICHD-funded Add Health Survey, religion reduces the likelihood of adolescents engaging in early sex by shaping their attitudes and beliefs about sexual activity. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">The study also found that parents' religious beliefs and attitudes toward sex did not directly influence teens' decisions to have sex. Rather, parents' attitudes toward sex seemed to influence their teens' own attitudes toward sex, and indirectly, their teens' behavior. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">When teens do have sex, their beliefs about the consequences of sexual activity become more permissive — meaning more positive or favorable — but their religious views do not change. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">In particular, adolescent girls who had sex reported that they were more positive about having sex in the future. However, the greatest predictor of whether teens would have sex — regardless of their religious views or attitudes — was whether or not they were dating. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Sexual intercourse places teens at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, and unintended pregnancy. The information provided by the study may prove important for health researchers and planners devising programs that help prevent teens from engaging in sexual activity. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">"A better understanding of why religious adolescents are less likely to engage in early sexual intercourse may help in designing prevention programs for this behavior," said Duane Alexander, M.D., Director of the NICHD.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>July 18, 2007
Abstinence Education Faces an Uncertain Future
By LAURA BEIL
HALLSVILLE, Tex. — When Jami Waite graduated from high school this year in this northeastern Texas town, her parents sat damp-eyed in the metal bleachers of Bobcat Stadium, proud in every way possible. Their youngest daughter was leaving childhood an honor graduate, a band member, a true friend, a head cheerleader — and a steadfast virgin.
"People can be abstinent, and it's not weird," she declared. With her face on billboards and on TV, Ms. Waite has been an emblem of sexual abstinence for Virginity Rules, which has risen from a single operation in nearby Longview to become an eight-county abstinence franchise.
For the first time, however, Virginity Rules and 700 kindred abstinence education programs are fighting serious threats to their future. Eleven state health departments rejected abstinence education this year, while legislatures in Colorado, Iowa and Washington passed laws that could kill, or at least wound, its presence in public schools.
Opponents received high-caliber ammunition this spring when the most comprehensive study of abstinence education found no sign that it delayed a teenager's sexual debut. And, after enjoying a fivefold increase in their main federal appropriations, the abstinence programs in June received their first cut in financing from the Senate appropriations committee since 2001.
But the final outcome is in question. Some $176 million in federal support has survived several early maneuvers in the House, and the full House plans to debate the issue July 18 as part of the proposed Health and Human Services budget.
Lost in the political rancor, however, is that teenagers throughout the country are both abstaining more, and, especially among older ones, more likely to use contraception when they do not abstain.
While the reasons are not all understood, government data show the trend began years before abstinence education became the multimillion-dollar enterprise it is today. Through a combination of less sex and more contraception, pregnancy and birth rates among American teenagers as a whole have been falling since about 1991. Texas, however, has seen the smallest decline despite receiving almost $17 million in the name of virginity.
No state has more to lose in this battle than Texas, which draws more abstinence money than any other. Drive through the piney woods of northeastern Texas, and the earnest faces of adolescents appear on billboards with slogans like "No is where I stand until I have a wedding band."
The Longview Wellness Center, which sponsors Virginity Rules, collects almost $1 million annually in abstinence financing, and serves 33 area school districts.
Even in this state, where President Bush acquired his loyalty to the policy, abstinence cannot be typecast. Megan Randolph of Dallas, who like Jami Waite just finished high school, believes in the abstinence message. But she is bothered by courses that try to scare teenagers with harrowing talk of ruined lives. "In those classes, there are going to be kids who have had sex and that hasn't happened," Ms. Randolph said. "So they're going to think that doesn't apply to them."
Teenagers, she said, crave unfettered information — the kind restricted under federal abstinence education law, which discourages intimacy outside marriage but provides no instruction for safer sex.
At her school, Ms. Randolph, 19, was the "sexpert," the one girls often called late at night, asking questions. And this year, before leaving Dallas to attend the Air Force Academy, Ms. Randolph was hailed as volunteer of the year by the area's Planned Parenthood — part of abstinence education's axis of evil.
In northeastern Texas, advocates of abstinence education vow to fight for their mission because to them, it is not just a matter of sexuality or even public health. Getting a teenager to the other side of high school without viruses or babies is a bonus, but not the real goal. They see casual sex as toxic to future marriage, family and even, in an oblique way, opposition to abortion.
"You have to look at why sex was created," Eric Love, the director of the East Texas Abstinence Program, which runs Virginity Rules, said one day, the sounds of Christian contemporary music humming faintly in his Longview office. "Sex was designed to bond two people together."
To make the point, Mr. Love grabbed a tape dispenser and snapped off two fresh pieces. He slapped them to his filing cabinet and the floor; they trapped dirt, lint, a small metal bolt. "Now when it comes time for them to get married, the marriage pulls apart so easily," he said, trying to unite the grimy strips. "Why? Because they gave the stickiness away."
Shoring up marriage was Robert Rector's vision a decade ago. A fellow at the Heritage Foundation, Mr. Rector wrote the first bill that legally defined abstinence education, and got it attached as a stowaway to the 1996 welfare overhaul, backed with $50 million for the states. A later Congress, irked at states' finding loopholes in the original intent, designated a second pool of abstinence money in 2001, now the lifeblood of the movement.
Mr. Rector says viewing abstinence primarily through the lens of public health distracted the focus from marriage. "Once you understand that that's the principal issue," he said, "you understand that handing out condoms to a 17-year-old is utterly irrelevant."
Strengthening marriage this way may resonate with teenagers like Ms. Waite, whose conviction is planted in a deeply held marital value, but not necessarily with Ms. Randolph, who says she is more preoccupied with succeeding in the Air Force than with marriage.
In abandoning abstinence education, states have largely said that comprehensive sex education programs, which discuss contraception beyond the failure rates, have a better scientific grounding. New laws in Colorado, Iowa and Washington state that sex education must be based on "research" or "science" — which is often interpreted as code for programs that include discussions of safer sex.
Much of the data cited in support of the efficacy of abstinence programs are from surveys taken immediately before and after a program. These commonly find an increase in intentions to stay abstinent, but do not necessarily mean that a year later, high on emotion, teenagers will follow the script.
Most studies so far have found no significant impact on behavior, and the few that do see only modest changes. In April, Mathematica Policy Research released a report that was nine years and $8 million in the making. Scientists followed middle school children enrolled in four separate abstinence programs for about five years, and found no difference in the age of first intercourse between them and their peers.
Opinions vary on whether the absence of evidence — to borrow from Carl Sagan — is evidence of absence. One of the leading experts on sex education programs, Dr. John Jemmott of the Annenberg School of Communication at the University of Pennsylvania , says some abstinence education programs in the future might show promise. He is hopeful about an abstinence curriculum that he has designed which, unlike many, tries to get teenagers to think long-term about their behavior and its consequences, questioning, for example, whether a boyfriend would really love you if you had sex with him. Many programs dwell on the risks of sex, not the reasons.
Dr. Jemmott knows many colleagues view abstinence education as a failed experiment. "I think that is unfair," he said. "I think what they should say is there is not enough evidence to state whether it is efficacious." On the other hand, he said, it is also unfair to say that sex education that discusses — without maligning — condoms encourages sex. Data from many programs, in fact, find the opposite.
[Those who thought abstinence education financing would decline swiftly under a Democratic watch were wrong: On July 11, the full House extended state grants through September — a reprieve at the edge of expiration. That same day, the House Appropriations Committee increased spending, a political move to make the proposed Health and Human Services budget more appealing to Republicans, said Representative David R. Obey, Democrat of Wisconsin, the committee chairman.]
While the future of abstinence education is unclear, Mr. Love, back in Longview, believes "the message will go on, whether the government decides to fund it or not."
Just ask Jami Waite. The former cheerleader is carrying her resolve to college, where she is on her way to becoming a nurse. One day she plans to wed. Until then, she says, virginity will rule.
Jacqueline Palank contributed reporting from Washington.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/18/educa ... ?th&emc=th
Abstinence Education Faces an Uncertain Future
By LAURA BEIL
HALLSVILLE, Tex. — When Jami Waite graduated from high school this year in this northeastern Texas town, her parents sat damp-eyed in the metal bleachers of Bobcat Stadium, proud in every way possible. Their youngest daughter was leaving childhood an honor graduate, a band member, a true friend, a head cheerleader — and a steadfast virgin.
"People can be abstinent, and it's not weird," she declared. With her face on billboards and on TV, Ms. Waite has been an emblem of sexual abstinence for Virginity Rules, which has risen from a single operation in nearby Longview to become an eight-county abstinence franchise.
For the first time, however, Virginity Rules and 700 kindred abstinence education programs are fighting serious threats to their future. Eleven state health departments rejected abstinence education this year, while legislatures in Colorado, Iowa and Washington passed laws that could kill, or at least wound, its presence in public schools.
Opponents received high-caliber ammunition this spring when the most comprehensive study of abstinence education found no sign that it delayed a teenager's sexual debut. And, after enjoying a fivefold increase in their main federal appropriations, the abstinence programs in June received their first cut in financing from the Senate appropriations committee since 2001.
But the final outcome is in question. Some $176 million in federal support has survived several early maneuvers in the House, and the full House plans to debate the issue July 18 as part of the proposed Health and Human Services budget.
Lost in the political rancor, however, is that teenagers throughout the country are both abstaining more, and, especially among older ones, more likely to use contraception when they do not abstain.
While the reasons are not all understood, government data show the trend began years before abstinence education became the multimillion-dollar enterprise it is today. Through a combination of less sex and more contraception, pregnancy and birth rates among American teenagers as a whole have been falling since about 1991. Texas, however, has seen the smallest decline despite receiving almost $17 million in the name of virginity.
No state has more to lose in this battle than Texas, which draws more abstinence money than any other. Drive through the piney woods of northeastern Texas, and the earnest faces of adolescents appear on billboards with slogans like "No is where I stand until I have a wedding band."
The Longview Wellness Center, which sponsors Virginity Rules, collects almost $1 million annually in abstinence financing, and serves 33 area school districts.
Even in this state, where President Bush acquired his loyalty to the policy, abstinence cannot be typecast. Megan Randolph of Dallas, who like Jami Waite just finished high school, believes in the abstinence message. But she is bothered by courses that try to scare teenagers with harrowing talk of ruined lives. "In those classes, there are going to be kids who have had sex and that hasn't happened," Ms. Randolph said. "So they're going to think that doesn't apply to them."
Teenagers, she said, crave unfettered information — the kind restricted under federal abstinence education law, which discourages intimacy outside marriage but provides no instruction for safer sex.
At her school, Ms. Randolph, 19, was the "sexpert," the one girls often called late at night, asking questions. And this year, before leaving Dallas to attend the Air Force Academy, Ms. Randolph was hailed as volunteer of the year by the area's Planned Parenthood — part of abstinence education's axis of evil.
In northeastern Texas, advocates of abstinence education vow to fight for their mission because to them, it is not just a matter of sexuality or even public health. Getting a teenager to the other side of high school without viruses or babies is a bonus, but not the real goal. They see casual sex as toxic to future marriage, family and even, in an oblique way, opposition to abortion.
"You have to look at why sex was created," Eric Love, the director of the East Texas Abstinence Program, which runs Virginity Rules, said one day, the sounds of Christian contemporary music humming faintly in his Longview office. "Sex was designed to bond two people together."
To make the point, Mr. Love grabbed a tape dispenser and snapped off two fresh pieces. He slapped them to his filing cabinet and the floor; they trapped dirt, lint, a small metal bolt. "Now when it comes time for them to get married, the marriage pulls apart so easily," he said, trying to unite the grimy strips. "Why? Because they gave the stickiness away."
Shoring up marriage was Robert Rector's vision a decade ago. A fellow at the Heritage Foundation, Mr. Rector wrote the first bill that legally defined abstinence education, and got it attached as a stowaway to the 1996 welfare overhaul, backed with $50 million for the states. A later Congress, irked at states' finding loopholes in the original intent, designated a second pool of abstinence money in 2001, now the lifeblood of the movement.
Mr. Rector says viewing abstinence primarily through the lens of public health distracted the focus from marriage. "Once you understand that that's the principal issue," he said, "you understand that handing out condoms to a 17-year-old is utterly irrelevant."
Strengthening marriage this way may resonate with teenagers like Ms. Waite, whose conviction is planted in a deeply held marital value, but not necessarily with Ms. Randolph, who says she is more preoccupied with succeeding in the Air Force than with marriage.
In abandoning abstinence education, states have largely said that comprehensive sex education programs, which discuss contraception beyond the failure rates, have a better scientific grounding. New laws in Colorado, Iowa and Washington state that sex education must be based on "research" or "science" — which is often interpreted as code for programs that include discussions of safer sex.
Much of the data cited in support of the efficacy of abstinence programs are from surveys taken immediately before and after a program. These commonly find an increase in intentions to stay abstinent, but do not necessarily mean that a year later, high on emotion, teenagers will follow the script.
Most studies so far have found no significant impact on behavior, and the few that do see only modest changes. In April, Mathematica Policy Research released a report that was nine years and $8 million in the making. Scientists followed middle school children enrolled in four separate abstinence programs for about five years, and found no difference in the age of first intercourse between them and their peers.
Opinions vary on whether the absence of evidence — to borrow from Carl Sagan — is evidence of absence. One of the leading experts on sex education programs, Dr. John Jemmott of the Annenberg School of Communication at the University of Pennsylvania , says some abstinence education programs in the future might show promise. He is hopeful about an abstinence curriculum that he has designed which, unlike many, tries to get teenagers to think long-term about their behavior and its consequences, questioning, for example, whether a boyfriend would really love you if you had sex with him. Many programs dwell on the risks of sex, not the reasons.
Dr. Jemmott knows many colleagues view abstinence education as a failed experiment. "I think that is unfair," he said. "I think what they should say is there is not enough evidence to state whether it is efficacious." On the other hand, he said, it is also unfair to say that sex education that discusses — without maligning — condoms encourages sex. Data from many programs, in fact, find the opposite.
[Those who thought abstinence education financing would decline swiftly under a Democratic watch were wrong: On July 11, the full House extended state grants through September — a reprieve at the edge of expiration. That same day, the House Appropriations Committee increased spending, a political move to make the proposed Health and Human Services budget more appealing to Republicans, said Representative David R. Obey, Democrat of Wisconsin, the committee chairman.]
While the future of abstinence education is unclear, Mr. Love, back in Longview, believes "the message will go on, whether the government decides to fund it or not."
Just ask Jami Waite. The former cheerleader is carrying her resolve to college, where she is on her way to becoming a nurse. One day she plans to wed. Until then, she says, virginity will rule.
Jacqueline Palank contributed reporting from Washington.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/18/educa ... ?th&emc=th
Doctors endorse cancer vaccine for girls
Maria Kubacki
CanWest News Service; with files from Calgary Herald
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Your little girl may still be playing with dolls and sleeping with her favourite teddy bear, but the Canadian Paediatric Society says she should receive the vaccine to prevent human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted infection identified as the major cause of cervical cancer.
On Monday, the group representing more than 2,500 pediatricians across Canada officially endorsed the vaccine, saying it should be given to girls aged nine to 13.
"It's a very safe, efficacious and exciting vaccine," said Dr. Lindy Samson, lead author of the pediatricians' position paper on Gardasil, the only HPV vaccine approved for use in Canada.
Samson stressed the importance of vaccinating girls before they become sexually active.
Several provinces, including Ontario, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, P.E.I. and British Columbia, have announced vaccination programs.
The Alberta government has yet to make a decision on a vaccination program.
Health and Wellness spokesman Howard May says officials are still waiting for the Canadian Immunization Committee's upcoming report.
"(The committee) has indicated that it might be the end of the calendar year before they have their recommendations ready," said May.
Other countries, including Australia, have also adopted universal HPV vaccination.
"We're very excited to have (the pediatricians') support," said Dr. Guylaine Lefebvre, president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, which also backs the vaccine touted as significantly lowering the risk of a cancer that kills about 400 women a year in Canada.
Pediatricians administer other childhood vaccines, and so are in a good position to influence parents with regard to the HPV vaccine, said Lefebvre, adding that children should be given Gardasil along with age-appropriate sex education.
The Paediatric Society indicated earlier this year that it intended to support the vaccine.
Canadian pediatricians and gynecologists are hardly alone in their enthusiasm for Gardasil, which clinical trials have found to be 98 per cent effective against pre-cancerous lesions caused by the two high-risk strains of HPV responsible for 70 per cent of cases of cervical cancer.
The vaccine, approved for use in Canadian girls and women aged nine to 26 last year, already has the support of the federal government.
Calgary pediatrician Dr. Peter Nieman said most families he sees are surprised with and opposed to the recommendation that girls as young as nine receive the vaccine. "I suppose I can understand that, because most girls are not going to be sexually active at that age," he says.
Nieman said he believes nine is too young when it comes to HPV vaccination. Personally, he wouldn't vaccinate his own daughter (who is 12) at age nine.
Dr. Jeff Pivnick, a Calgary-based physician, said he has seen a lot of interest in the vaccine. "I've got parents asking about it all the time," he said. "I haven't had parents of girls nine years old, but I've had parents of teenage girls, and I'm now starting to recommend (the vaccine)."
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Maria Kubacki
CanWest News Service; with files from Calgary Herald
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Your little girl may still be playing with dolls and sleeping with her favourite teddy bear, but the Canadian Paediatric Society says she should receive the vaccine to prevent human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted infection identified as the major cause of cervical cancer.
On Monday, the group representing more than 2,500 pediatricians across Canada officially endorsed the vaccine, saying it should be given to girls aged nine to 13.
"It's a very safe, efficacious and exciting vaccine," said Dr. Lindy Samson, lead author of the pediatricians' position paper on Gardasil, the only HPV vaccine approved for use in Canada.
Samson stressed the importance of vaccinating girls before they become sexually active.
Several provinces, including Ontario, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, P.E.I. and British Columbia, have announced vaccination programs.
The Alberta government has yet to make a decision on a vaccination program.
Health and Wellness spokesman Howard May says officials are still waiting for the Canadian Immunization Committee's upcoming report.
"(The committee) has indicated that it might be the end of the calendar year before they have their recommendations ready," said May.
Other countries, including Australia, have also adopted universal HPV vaccination.
"We're very excited to have (the pediatricians') support," said Dr. Guylaine Lefebvre, president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, which also backs the vaccine touted as significantly lowering the risk of a cancer that kills about 400 women a year in Canada.
Pediatricians administer other childhood vaccines, and so are in a good position to influence parents with regard to the HPV vaccine, said Lefebvre, adding that children should be given Gardasil along with age-appropriate sex education.
The Paediatric Society indicated earlier this year that it intended to support the vaccine.
Canadian pediatricians and gynecologists are hardly alone in their enthusiasm for Gardasil, which clinical trials have found to be 98 per cent effective against pre-cancerous lesions caused by the two high-risk strains of HPV responsible for 70 per cent of cases of cervical cancer.
The vaccine, approved for use in Canadian girls and women aged nine to 26 last year, already has the support of the federal government.
Calgary pediatrician Dr. Peter Nieman said most families he sees are surprised with and opposed to the recommendation that girls as young as nine receive the vaccine. "I suppose I can understand that, because most girls are not going to be sexually active at that age," he says.
Nieman said he believes nine is too young when it comes to HPV vaccination. Personally, he wouldn't vaccinate his own daughter (who is 12) at age nine.
Dr. Jeff Pivnick, a Calgary-based physician, said he has seen a lot of interest in the vaccine. "I've got parents asking about it all the time," he said. "I haven't had parents of girls nine years old, but I've had parents of teenage girls, and I'm now starting to recommend (the vaccine)."
© The Calgary Herald 2007
I used to masturbate regularly for three years.
Now I don't see any porn but still I do it once in 2-3 days. I feel alot guilty now but when it gets 2-3 days....i start feeling very uncomfortable down there...it feels like i must have to do it...
Is it okay to do it ? Is it forbidden in Islam ?
As with changing times, almost everyone do it but is there still a restriction applies? Is it sinful ?
As more I read on our Faith and try to practice it, still I am finding it a bit difficult to completely stop it. I lose it in 2-3 days. I feel I am putting a burden on my soul but I seriously feel very uncomfortable and it feels like I should go and watch a porn but I know I can't do it and I'll never do it.
Please guide me thoroughly on this issue.
And I don't masturbate thinking of any normal girl. I think of those scenes which I used to see before.
Thank You.
Kmaherali..I guess you're the right person to guide me on this topic. But anyone else who also has information on this topic can guide me out.
Thanks in advance.
Anyone who has experienced such problems and got success in controlling please help me.
Now I don't see any porn but still I do it once in 2-3 days. I feel alot guilty now but when it gets 2-3 days....i start feeling very uncomfortable down there...it feels like i must have to do it...
Is it okay to do it ? Is it forbidden in Islam ?
As with changing times, almost everyone do it but is there still a restriction applies? Is it sinful ?
As more I read on our Faith and try to practice it, still I am finding it a bit difficult to completely stop it. I lose it in 2-3 days. I feel I am putting a burden on my soul but I seriously feel very uncomfortable and it feels like I should go and watch a porn but I know I can't do it and I'll never do it.
Please guide me thoroughly on this issue.
And I don't masturbate thinking of any normal girl. I think of those scenes which I used to see before.
Thank You.
Kmaherali..I guess you're the right person to guide me on this topic. But anyone else who also has information on this topic can guide me out.
Thanks in advance.
Anyone who has experienced such problems and got success in controlling please help me.
Last edited by st0necol on Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you search the word 'masturbation', you will get all the relevant threads that discuss it. In particular you may want to go to:st0necol wrote:Please guide me thoroughly on this issue.
Kmaherali..I guess you're the right person to guide me on this topic. But anyone else who also has information on this topic can guide me out.
Thanks in advance.
Anyone who has experienced such problems and got success in controlling please help me.
Current Issues --> This is a sad question...but have to ask.
Young and oversexed no happier: survey
Randy Shore
CanWest News Service
Sunday, October 07, 2007
When you give the numbers a hard look, the truth is just what you've always suspected -- about 20 per cent of the people are having 80 per cent of the sex.
Younger people are piling up large numbers of sexual partners and employing high technology in their search for satisfaction, but in the end they are no happier than the rest of us, according to a B.C. poll.
"It's really just a few people doing the heavy lifting with a small group reporting more than 31 partners," said Ipsos Reid pollster Kyle Braid. "And the number of partners is much higher among those who are not satisfied with their sex life."
Those aged 35 to 54 may be married, but are adventurous about where they have sex and which toys they use, and they have accumulated an impressive average of 17 different sex partners.
For those 55 and up, more than half report not having any sex at all in the past 30 days, though about 14 per cent still have sex more than six times a month.
The Ipsos Reid Survey was commissioned by CanWest News Service about the sex lives of 1,571 people who live in B.C.'s Lower Mainland. All the numbers quoted exclude the three per cent of respondents who say they have never had sex, and are considered accurate within 2.5 percentage points.
About 40 per cent of 18- to 34-year-olds said they have sex six or more times a month and 73 per cent of those in a committed relationship -- but not married -- are having sex at least four times a month.
The people who are doing it the most are in a committed relationship but not yet married, the pollster explained.
"Young people are having a lot of sex," but, he said "What really defines them is their use of technology."
They are three times as likely to have had sex over the Internet and four times more likely to have had phone sex than people over 55. They are more than twice as likely to use porn with a sex partner or indulge in sado-masochism.
Despite all that adventure, this younger demographic is no more likely to report satisfaction with their sex lives than anyone else, Braid said.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Randy Shore
CanWest News Service
Sunday, October 07, 2007
When you give the numbers a hard look, the truth is just what you've always suspected -- about 20 per cent of the people are having 80 per cent of the sex.
Younger people are piling up large numbers of sexual partners and employing high technology in their search for satisfaction, but in the end they are no happier than the rest of us, according to a B.C. poll.
"It's really just a few people doing the heavy lifting with a small group reporting more than 31 partners," said Ipsos Reid pollster Kyle Braid. "And the number of partners is much higher among those who are not satisfied with their sex life."
Those aged 35 to 54 may be married, but are adventurous about where they have sex and which toys they use, and they have accumulated an impressive average of 17 different sex partners.
For those 55 and up, more than half report not having any sex at all in the past 30 days, though about 14 per cent still have sex more than six times a month.
The Ipsos Reid Survey was commissioned by CanWest News Service about the sex lives of 1,571 people who live in B.C.'s Lower Mainland. All the numbers quoted exclude the three per cent of respondents who say they have never had sex, and are considered accurate within 2.5 percentage points.
About 40 per cent of 18- to 34-year-olds said they have sex six or more times a month and 73 per cent of those in a committed relationship -- but not married -- are having sex at least four times a month.
The people who are doing it the most are in a committed relationship but not yet married, the pollster explained.
"Young people are having a lot of sex," but, he said "What really defines them is their use of technology."
They are three times as likely to have had sex over the Internet and four times more likely to have had phone sex than people over 55. They are more than twice as likely to use porn with a sex partner or indulge in sado-masochism.
Despite all that adventure, this younger demographic is no more likely to report satisfaction with their sex lives than anyone else, Braid said.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Strong Religious Views Decrease Teens' Likelihood of Having Sex
Teens — particularly girls — with strong religious views are less likely to have sex than are less religious teens, largely because their religious views lead them to view the consequences of having sex negatively. According to a recent analysis of the NICHD-funded Add Health Survey, religion reduces the likelihood of adolescents engaging in early sex by shaping their attitudes and beliefs about sexual activity.
The study also found that parents' religious beliefs and attitudes toward sex did not directly influence teens' decisions to have sex. Rather, parents' attitudes toward sex seemed to influence their teens' own attitudes toward sex, and indirectly, their teens' behavior.
When teens do have sex, their beliefs about the consequences of sexual activity become more permissive — meaning more positive or favorable — but their religious views do not change.
In particular, adolescent girls who had sex reported that they were more positive about having sex in the future. However, the greatest predictor of whether teens would have sex — regardless of their religious views or attitudes — was whether or not they were dating.
Sexual intercourse places teens at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, and unintended pregnancy. The information provided by the study may prove important for health researchers and planners devising programs that help prevent teens from engaging in sexual activity.
"A better understanding of why religious adolescents are less likely to engage in early sexual intercourse may help in designing prevention programs for this behavior," said Duane Alexander, M.D., Director of the NICHD.
Teens — particularly girls — with strong religious views are less likely to have sex than are less religious teens, largely because their religious views lead them to view the consequences of having sex negatively. According to a recent analysis of the NICHD-funded Add Health Survey, religion reduces the likelihood of adolescents engaging in early sex by shaping their attitudes and beliefs about sexual activity.
The study also found that parents' religious beliefs and attitudes toward sex did not directly influence teens' decisions to have sex. Rather, parents' attitudes toward sex seemed to influence their teens' own attitudes toward sex, and indirectly, their teens' behavior.
When teens do have sex, their beliefs about the consequences of sexual activity become more permissive — meaning more positive or favorable — but their religious views do not change.
In particular, adolescent girls who had sex reported that they were more positive about having sex in the future. However, the greatest predictor of whether teens would have sex — regardless of their religious views or attitudes — was whether or not they were dating.
Sexual intercourse places teens at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, and unintended pregnancy. The information provided by the study may prove important for health researchers and planners devising programs that help prevent teens from engaging in sexual activity.
"A better understanding of why religious adolescents are less likely to engage in early sexual intercourse may help in designing prevention programs for this behavior," said Duane Alexander, M.D., Director of the NICHD.
Mentors help teens resist temptation
Graeme Morton
Calgary Herald
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Calgary church leaders need to do a better job talking to teens about sexuality in a pop-culture society that's infused with a "go-for-it" mentality.
That's the advice from Jill Kulhawy, the founder of Gammagirls, an international mentorship program that gives teenage girls a Christian alternative to the pervasive media message that premarital sex is the norm.
"Are all the youth valued in your church, not just the good musicians or the natural leaders?" Kulhawy asked those attending Thursday's Calgary Evangelical Ministerial Association meeting.
"Is your church a place of grace for young girls who are pregnant or for teens who are
really struggling with the temptations of their age?"
Kulhawy, who works at the Calgary Pregnancy Care Centre, developed the Gammagirls program to help girls between 13 and 17 deal with issues of sexuality, self-image, risk management and communication within a Christian context. The 10-week mentoring program has been conducted in dozens of Calgary churches and is spreading across Canada, the U.S. and even overseas.
"Spirituality is the strength of our program," said Kulhawy. "Girls in our churches have as many sexuality issues as those who don't go to church."
Kulhawy noted rates of sexual activity in teenage girls who attend church aren't much lower than their peers in the general population, where more than 45 per cent of females between 14 and 19 years old say they've had sex.
Confronted by an omnipresent media where sex is front-and-centre, Kulhawy said today's teens hunger to fill internal needs from external sources. Their emotions are in overdrive, but their capacity to connect immediate actions to long-term consequences has yet to mature.
"And once they've crossed the line with sex, teens are much more likely to get into other problems with drinking, pornography or drugs," Kulhawy said.
She noted teen romances usually last between two and five months and often break up after initial experiments with sex, leaving participants at least depressed and at worst carrying a sexually transmitted disease, or pregnant.
"We're fighting a difficult, toxic environment," Kulhawy told local church leaders. "Teens need positive adult role models and we need to give them a place where they can see healthy relationships in action."
More information is available a www.gammagirls.org.
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Graeme Morton
Calgary Herald
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Calgary church leaders need to do a better job talking to teens about sexuality in a pop-culture society that's infused with a "go-for-it" mentality.
That's the advice from Jill Kulhawy, the founder of Gammagirls, an international mentorship program that gives teenage girls a Christian alternative to the pervasive media message that premarital sex is the norm.
"Are all the youth valued in your church, not just the good musicians or the natural leaders?" Kulhawy asked those attending Thursday's Calgary Evangelical Ministerial Association meeting.
"Is your church a place of grace for young girls who are pregnant or for teens who are
really struggling with the temptations of their age?"
Kulhawy, who works at the Calgary Pregnancy Care Centre, developed the Gammagirls program to help girls between 13 and 17 deal with issues of sexuality, self-image, risk management and communication within a Christian context. The 10-week mentoring program has been conducted in dozens of Calgary churches and is spreading across Canada, the U.S. and even overseas.
"Spirituality is the strength of our program," said Kulhawy. "Girls in our churches have as many sexuality issues as those who don't go to church."
Kulhawy noted rates of sexual activity in teenage girls who attend church aren't much lower than their peers in the general population, where more than 45 per cent of females between 14 and 19 years old say they've had sex.
Confronted by an omnipresent media where sex is front-and-centre, Kulhawy said today's teens hunger to fill internal needs from external sources. Their emotions are in overdrive, but their capacity to connect immediate actions to long-term consequences has yet to mature.
"And once they've crossed the line with sex, teens are much more likely to get into other problems with drinking, pornography or drugs," Kulhawy said.
She noted teen romances usually last between two and five months and often break up after initial experiments with sex, leaving participants at least depressed and at worst carrying a sexually transmitted disease, or pregnant.
"We're fighting a difficult, toxic environment," Kulhawy told local church leaders. "Teens need positive adult role models and we need to give them a place where they can see healthy relationships in action."
More information is available a www.gammagirls.org.
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Many young females not using condoms: survey
CanWest News Service
Friday, November 30, 2007
A new national poll focusing on birth control and the sexual attitudes of young women between 16 and 24 suggests there's plenty of room for concern when it comes to risky sexual behaviour by youths.
They survey found two-thirds of women polled said they don't use a condom every time they have sex.
And one in five females never use a condom during sex, the poll found, and 72 per cent don't take birth control correctly.
The Leger Marketing poll was based on interviews with 600 Canadian women, and has a margin of error of plus or minus four points, 19 times out of 20.
For Saleema Noon, a Vancouver consultant who works with school-age children, one of the most worrisome results of the study shows that some women do not insist sexual partners use condoms.
"I think this study highlights the fact that we still have a lot of teaching to do when it comes to (Sexually Transmitted Infection) prevention," she said.
"AIDS is not (necessarily) what we are worried about," she said. "There are many other STIs that are way more common among teens . . . chlamydia, gonorrhea, human papilloma virus.
"I try and get teens away from thinking about the big 'A' and focus on things that they are more likely to get but can still have a significant impact on their lives."
© The Calgary Herald 2007
CanWest News Service
Friday, November 30, 2007
A new national poll focusing on birth control and the sexual attitudes of young women between 16 and 24 suggests there's plenty of room for concern when it comes to risky sexual behaviour by youths.
They survey found two-thirds of women polled said they don't use a condom every time they have sex.
And one in five females never use a condom during sex, the poll found, and 72 per cent don't take birth control correctly.
The Leger Marketing poll was based on interviews with 600 Canadian women, and has a margin of error of plus or minus four points, 19 times out of 20.
For Saleema Noon, a Vancouver consultant who works with school-age children, one of the most worrisome results of the study shows that some women do not insist sexual partners use condoms.
"I think this study highlights the fact that we still have a lot of teaching to do when it comes to (Sexually Transmitted Infection) prevention," she said.
"AIDS is not (necessarily) what we are worried about," she said. "There are many other STIs that are way more common among teens . . . chlamydia, gonorrhea, human papilloma virus.
"I try and get teens away from thinking about the big 'A' and focus on things that they are more likely to get but can still have a significant impact on their lives."
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Talking homosexuality with kids never easy
Kim Gray
Calgary Herald
Monday, December 03, 2007
The questions are coming. You know they are. It's just a matter of time.
Meanwhile, how you as a parent will respond is worth considering.
At least, this is the opinion of one Calgary parenting consultant and I'm
inclined to agree with her.
I'm not just talking about sex. I'm talking about the question of
homosexuality. And how you -- no matter what your beliefs are -- plan to
address the topic when it surfaces.
"You need to practise what you're going to say. So your children's initial
questions don't freak you out so much that they never ask you a question
again," says consultant Julie Freedman Smith of Calgary's Parenting Power.
"It was much less common for our generation's parents to talk about
homosexuality, which is why so many of us are uncomfortable. We don't have a script to work from," she says.
She encourages parents, who want to read up on children and sexuality, to pick up a copy of Justin Richardson's Everything You Never Wanted Your Kids to Know about Sex but Were Afraid They'd Ask (Random House, 2003).
"These days, our kids are exposed to so much," she says. "Especially through the media. We need to be prepared. There's a whole chapter in this book as well on what to do if you think your child might be gay and how to go there, how to give them support."
Still, I'm wondering, why, in this day and age -- when so many of us have
gay and lesbian friends and relatives who are open about their sexual
preferences -- is talking about homosexuality uncomfortable?
The fact is -- according to Dr. Justin Richardson (who, aside from writing
the said book, is an assistant professor of psychiatry at Columbia and
Cornell universities) -- our generation is flying by the seat of our pants.
"We're facing a new challenge. When we were little kids, we probably weren't in kindergarten with playmates who had two moms or two dads," says Richardson during a telephone conversation from his office in New York City.
"We're hesitant because as adults we think that to talk about gay families
is to talk about gay sex. Therefore parents are squeamish. I can promise you that while an adult might think of a gay couple and think of them having sex, a second grader will not think that abstractly. They're just thinking that they're two people in love who happen to be same sex -- who aren't that different from Mom and Dad," says Richardson.
"It's also common for people to wonder that if they talk about gay issues,
they may influence their child's eventual sexual orientation," he says.
"Because nobody is able to say, 'This is what makes someone gay.' So parents naturally want to be careful and conservative."
That said, Richardson firmly believes, as do other experts in the field,
that being educated about homosexuality is not a factor when it comes to a child's sexual orientation.
What's more, if kids ask us questions and we don't answer them, we're
teaching them to clam up. "Eventually, when your son might need a condom and doesn't know where to get one, he might not ask you. And he may end up having unprotected sex. Plus, you want your child to come to you if he or she sees something puzzling on the Internet."
Freedman Smith says parents should answer questions in an age-specific way. When her daughter was three, for example, she would say she "loved her best friend and was going to be in love with her" forever.
"Then we'd talk about the difference between friend love and romantic adult love," she says. Couples, in her children's minds, have always been men and women -- but they have also been women and women, and men and men.
"That's the way the world is. These are our friends," says Freedman Smith.
As your children ages, the conversation can become more abstract.
"Then we can start to talk about how people are different but how we are the same as well," she says.
"A person may feel physical love for someone of the same gender, but they still hurt and bleed the same as the rest of us."
The key is to let kids know that even though it may feel weird asking
questions, you're listening. "You can admit you may not have all the
answers," she says. "But it's important to say you're willing to help do the
research."
Like most parents, I am constantly surprised at the learning curve involved when you raise a family.
Our goal as parents is to orient our children in a complex world so they can eventually fend for themselves -- all the while being sensitive to their
place, and the place of others, in a diverse society.
If this is my goal, then my plan this weekend is to pick up a copy of
Richardson's second book: the award-winning And Tango Makes Three (Simon and Schuster, 2005).
"It's a book for young children based on a true story about how two male
penguins at the Central Park Zoo wanted a chick so much they tried to hatch a rock. The zoo keeper found them an egg and they raised a lovely female penguin named Tango," says Richardson.
The book, he says, is not a civics "gay-people-are-good" lesson. Rather,
it's a book kids love that introduces the notion of "non-traditional"
families to children in a matter-of-fact way.
A life lesson taught through the eyes of three penguins? Sounds good to me. I don't know about you, but I need all the help I can get.
Kim Gray is a journalist and mother of two; she welcomes your feedback as well as column ideas at [email protected]
Helpful Resource
Interested in a copy of Parenting Power's course about kids and sexuality,
Yikes -- How do I answer that? Check out parentingpower.ca
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Kim Gray
Calgary Herald
Monday, December 03, 2007
The questions are coming. You know they are. It's just a matter of time.
Meanwhile, how you as a parent will respond is worth considering.
At least, this is the opinion of one Calgary parenting consultant and I'm
inclined to agree with her.
I'm not just talking about sex. I'm talking about the question of
homosexuality. And how you -- no matter what your beliefs are -- plan to
address the topic when it surfaces.
"You need to practise what you're going to say. So your children's initial
questions don't freak you out so much that they never ask you a question
again," says consultant Julie Freedman Smith of Calgary's Parenting Power.
"It was much less common for our generation's parents to talk about
homosexuality, which is why so many of us are uncomfortable. We don't have a script to work from," she says.
She encourages parents, who want to read up on children and sexuality, to pick up a copy of Justin Richardson's Everything You Never Wanted Your Kids to Know about Sex but Were Afraid They'd Ask (Random House, 2003).
"These days, our kids are exposed to so much," she says. "Especially through the media. We need to be prepared. There's a whole chapter in this book as well on what to do if you think your child might be gay and how to go there, how to give them support."
Still, I'm wondering, why, in this day and age -- when so many of us have
gay and lesbian friends and relatives who are open about their sexual
preferences -- is talking about homosexuality uncomfortable?
The fact is -- according to Dr. Justin Richardson (who, aside from writing
the said book, is an assistant professor of psychiatry at Columbia and
Cornell universities) -- our generation is flying by the seat of our pants.
"We're facing a new challenge. When we were little kids, we probably weren't in kindergarten with playmates who had two moms or two dads," says Richardson during a telephone conversation from his office in New York City.
"We're hesitant because as adults we think that to talk about gay families
is to talk about gay sex. Therefore parents are squeamish. I can promise you that while an adult might think of a gay couple and think of them having sex, a second grader will not think that abstractly. They're just thinking that they're two people in love who happen to be same sex -- who aren't that different from Mom and Dad," says Richardson.
"It's also common for people to wonder that if they talk about gay issues,
they may influence their child's eventual sexual orientation," he says.
"Because nobody is able to say, 'This is what makes someone gay.' So parents naturally want to be careful and conservative."
That said, Richardson firmly believes, as do other experts in the field,
that being educated about homosexuality is not a factor when it comes to a child's sexual orientation.
What's more, if kids ask us questions and we don't answer them, we're
teaching them to clam up. "Eventually, when your son might need a condom and doesn't know where to get one, he might not ask you. And he may end up having unprotected sex. Plus, you want your child to come to you if he or she sees something puzzling on the Internet."
Freedman Smith says parents should answer questions in an age-specific way. When her daughter was three, for example, she would say she "loved her best friend and was going to be in love with her" forever.
"Then we'd talk about the difference between friend love and romantic adult love," she says. Couples, in her children's minds, have always been men and women -- but they have also been women and women, and men and men.
"That's the way the world is. These are our friends," says Freedman Smith.
As your children ages, the conversation can become more abstract.
"Then we can start to talk about how people are different but how we are the same as well," she says.
"A person may feel physical love for someone of the same gender, but they still hurt and bleed the same as the rest of us."
The key is to let kids know that even though it may feel weird asking
questions, you're listening. "You can admit you may not have all the
answers," she says. "But it's important to say you're willing to help do the
research."
Like most parents, I am constantly surprised at the learning curve involved when you raise a family.
Our goal as parents is to orient our children in a complex world so they can eventually fend for themselves -- all the while being sensitive to their
place, and the place of others, in a diverse society.
If this is my goal, then my plan this weekend is to pick up a copy of
Richardson's second book: the award-winning And Tango Makes Three (Simon and Schuster, 2005).
"It's a book for young children based on a true story about how two male
penguins at the Central Park Zoo wanted a chick so much they tried to hatch a rock. The zoo keeper found them an egg and they raised a lovely female penguin named Tango," says Richardson.
The book, he says, is not a civics "gay-people-are-good" lesson. Rather,
it's a book kids love that introduces the notion of "non-traditional"
families to children in a matter-of-fact way.
A life lesson taught through the eyes of three penguins? Sounds good to me. I don't know about you, but I need all the help I can get.
Kim Gray is a journalist and mother of two; she welcomes your feedback as well as column ideas at [email protected]
Helpful Resource
Interested in a copy of Parenting Power's course about kids and sexuality,
Yikes -- How do I answer that? Check out parentingpower.ca
© The Calgary Herald 2007
December 6, 2007
Teenage Birth Rate Rises for First Time Since ’91
By GARDINER HARRIS
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5 — The birth rate among teenagers 15 to 19 in the United States rose 3 percent in 2006, according to a report issued Wednesday, the first such increase since 1991. The finding surprised scholars and fueled a debate about whether the Bush administration’s abstinence-only sexual education efforts are working.
The federal government spends $176 million annually on such programs. But a landmark study recently failed to demonstrate that they have any effect on delaying sexual activity among teenagers, and some studies suggest that they may actually increase pregnancy rates.
“Spending tens of million of tax dollars each year on programs that hurt our children is bad medicine and bad public policy,” said Dr. David A. Grimes, vice president of Family Health International, a nonprofit reproductive health organization based in North Carolina.
Robert Rector, a senior research fellow with the Heritage Foundation, said that blaming abstinence-only programs was “stupid.” Mr. Rector said that most young women who became pregnant were highly educated about contraceptives but wanted to have babies.
President Bush noted the long decline in teenage pregnancy rates in his 2006 State of the Union address, saying, “Wise policies such as welfare reform, drug education and support for abstinence and adoption have made a difference in the character of our country.”
The White House did not respond to requests for comment Wednesday.
In a speech last year, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said that rates of teenage pregnancy declined during the Clinton administration because of a focus on family planning.
Teenage birth rates are driven by rates of sex, contraception and abortion. In the 1990s, teenage sex rates dropped and condom use rose because teenagers were scared of AIDS, said Dr. John S. Santelli, chairman of the department of population and family health at Columbia University.
But recent advances in AIDS treatments have lowered concerns about the disease, and AIDS education efforts, which emphasized abstinence and condom use, have flagged.
Perhaps as a result, teenage sex rates have risen since 2001 and condom use has dropped since 2003. Abortion rates have held steady for a decade, although numbers from 2005 and 2006 are not available.
Kristin A. Moore, a senior scholar at Child Trends, a nonprofit children’s research organization, said the increase in the teenage birth rate was particularly alarming because even the 2005 rate was far higher than that in other industrialized countries.
“It’s really quite disappointing because we weren’t close to reaching our goal,” Dr. Moore said.
The lone bright spot in Wednesday’s report, issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was that the birth rate for girls 14 and under dropped to 0.6 percent per 1,000 from 0.7 percent. Birth rates rose 3 percent among teenagers ages 15 to 17 and 4 percent among those ages 18 and 19.
The largest increase came among black teenagers, but increases were also seen among whites, Hispanics and American Indians. Birth rates among Asian teenagers continued to drop.
Unmarried childbearing reached a record high in 2006, according to the disease control centers, with unmarried mothers now accounting for 38.5 percent of all births. Births among teenagers and unmarried women tend to lead to poor outcomes for their children.
Helping to prevent these pregnancies was the reason advocates pushed for the wide availability of the morning-after pill known as Plan B. The Food and Drug Administration approved sales of Plan B without a prescription in August 2006, too late to have any effect on that year’s birth rate.
Mr. Rector of the Heritage Foundation said that teenage and unmarried birth rates were driven by the same factors: young women with little education who are devoted to mothering but see no great need to be married.
“We should be telling them that for the well-being of any child, it’s critically important that you be over the age of 20 and that you be married,” he said. “That message is not given at all.”
Dr. Santelli of Columbia said that many abstinence-only educational efforts tended to emphasize that contraceptives often fail. “They scare kids about contraception,” he said.
The report also found that the Caesarean delivery rate continued its rise, increasing 3 percent in 2006 to 31.1 percent of all births, a record. In recent years, women who have had one birth by Caesarean have often been discouraged from having subsequent births vaginally. And there is some evidence that a growing number of women are requesting Caesareans to avoid pain or vaginal stretching.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists published a position paper last month stating that some Caesareans-upon-request should be discouraged. Women who have multiple Caesarean births are more likely to suffer uterine rupture and other serious consequences.
Dr. Robert Freeman, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, Irvine, said that managed-care companies no longer discouraged Caesareans and malpractice fears often led doctors to opt for Caesarean at the first hint of trouble.
“These numbers are bad news,” Dr. Freeman said, “and I think it’s only going to get worse.”
For the first time since 1971, the nation’s overall fertility rate rose past the replacement rate, increasing 2 percent in 2006 to 2,101 births per 1,000 women. Women of almost every age had more children last year than the year before, except girls under 15 and women over 45.
Teenage Birth Rate Rises for First Time Since ’91
By GARDINER HARRIS
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5 — The birth rate among teenagers 15 to 19 in the United States rose 3 percent in 2006, according to a report issued Wednesday, the first such increase since 1991. The finding surprised scholars and fueled a debate about whether the Bush administration’s abstinence-only sexual education efforts are working.
The federal government spends $176 million annually on such programs. But a landmark study recently failed to demonstrate that they have any effect on delaying sexual activity among teenagers, and some studies suggest that they may actually increase pregnancy rates.
“Spending tens of million of tax dollars each year on programs that hurt our children is bad medicine and bad public policy,” said Dr. David A. Grimes, vice president of Family Health International, a nonprofit reproductive health organization based in North Carolina.
Robert Rector, a senior research fellow with the Heritage Foundation, said that blaming abstinence-only programs was “stupid.” Mr. Rector said that most young women who became pregnant were highly educated about contraceptives but wanted to have babies.
President Bush noted the long decline in teenage pregnancy rates in his 2006 State of the Union address, saying, “Wise policies such as welfare reform, drug education and support for abstinence and adoption have made a difference in the character of our country.”
The White House did not respond to requests for comment Wednesday.
In a speech last year, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said that rates of teenage pregnancy declined during the Clinton administration because of a focus on family planning.
Teenage birth rates are driven by rates of sex, contraception and abortion. In the 1990s, teenage sex rates dropped and condom use rose because teenagers were scared of AIDS, said Dr. John S. Santelli, chairman of the department of population and family health at Columbia University.
But recent advances in AIDS treatments have lowered concerns about the disease, and AIDS education efforts, which emphasized abstinence and condom use, have flagged.
Perhaps as a result, teenage sex rates have risen since 2001 and condom use has dropped since 2003. Abortion rates have held steady for a decade, although numbers from 2005 and 2006 are not available.
Kristin A. Moore, a senior scholar at Child Trends, a nonprofit children’s research organization, said the increase in the teenage birth rate was particularly alarming because even the 2005 rate was far higher than that in other industrialized countries.
“It’s really quite disappointing because we weren’t close to reaching our goal,” Dr. Moore said.
The lone bright spot in Wednesday’s report, issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was that the birth rate for girls 14 and under dropped to 0.6 percent per 1,000 from 0.7 percent. Birth rates rose 3 percent among teenagers ages 15 to 17 and 4 percent among those ages 18 and 19.
The largest increase came among black teenagers, but increases were also seen among whites, Hispanics and American Indians. Birth rates among Asian teenagers continued to drop.
Unmarried childbearing reached a record high in 2006, according to the disease control centers, with unmarried mothers now accounting for 38.5 percent of all births. Births among teenagers and unmarried women tend to lead to poor outcomes for their children.
Helping to prevent these pregnancies was the reason advocates pushed for the wide availability of the morning-after pill known as Plan B. The Food and Drug Administration approved sales of Plan B without a prescription in August 2006, too late to have any effect on that year’s birth rate.
Mr. Rector of the Heritage Foundation said that teenage and unmarried birth rates were driven by the same factors: young women with little education who are devoted to mothering but see no great need to be married.
“We should be telling them that for the well-being of any child, it’s critically important that you be over the age of 20 and that you be married,” he said. “That message is not given at all.”
Dr. Santelli of Columbia said that many abstinence-only educational efforts tended to emphasize that contraceptives often fail. “They scare kids about contraception,” he said.
The report also found that the Caesarean delivery rate continued its rise, increasing 3 percent in 2006 to 31.1 percent of all births, a record. In recent years, women who have had one birth by Caesarean have often been discouraged from having subsequent births vaginally. And there is some evidence that a growing number of women are requesting Caesareans to avoid pain or vaginal stretching.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists published a position paper last month stating that some Caesareans-upon-request should be discouraged. Women who have multiple Caesarean births are more likely to suffer uterine rupture and other serious consequences.
Dr. Robert Freeman, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, Irvine, said that managed-care companies no longer discouraged Caesareans and malpractice fears often led doctors to opt for Caesarean at the first hint of trouble.
“These numbers are bad news,” Dr. Freeman said, “and I think it’s only going to get worse.”
For the first time since 1971, the nation’s overall fertility rate rose past the replacement rate, increasing 2 percent in 2006 to 2,101 births per 1,000 women. Women of almost every age had more children last year than the year before, except girls under 15 and women over 45.
Sex education failing to curb risky encounters by teenagers
Susan Martinuk
For The Calgary Herald
Friday, December 28, 2007
A Leger Marketing survey on the sexual attitudes of Canada's young women suggests our current approach to sex education isn't working.
Comprehensive, no-holds barred sex education programs were supposed to produce women who are knowledgeable, confident and capable of making smart sexual decisions.
But the survey reveals a very different product: A generation who are sloppy and unknowledgeable about birth control, and relatively unconcerned about risky sexual behaviours.
Despite being pummelled with the 'always use a condom' philosophy, one in five women (aged 16-24) never use condoms. Age and maturity don't matter much, as condom use declines with age. Surprisingly, 23 to 24 year-olds are more likely to not use them than their younger counterparts.
About 90 per cent of these "one in five" are/have been on oral contraceptives (OCs). But that's of little comfort, since they apparently believe that OCs are capable of protecting them against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).
If this data is concerning, so is its interpretation by the so-called experts. The Canada-wide news story quoted Saleema Noon, a Vancouver-based, private sexual-health educator. The statistics on birth control pills set off alarm bells for her -- but not for reasons you might think. Her great concern is that 71 per cent of women aren't committed to any particular brand of OC and are open to switching.
The market is about to be flooded by generic OCs. Without a strong commitment to brand-name contraceptives, Noon believes young women will be attracted to the cheaper generic pills that may have different side effects and "haven't been subjected to the rigorous testing" of brand-name pills. As such, she reminds young people it is their "right" to "specifically ask for that brand name" product, and encourages them to stick to it, regardless of price or recommendations of health professionals.
But her worries are false and misleading. Generic drugs have the exact same chemistry as brand-name drugs, and Noon should know that. (Perhaps we should be asking which pharmaceutical companies are supporting Noon and her sales pitch for brand-name products.)
If prominent educators are passing on the wrong information about OCs, it explains some of the confusion exhibited by those who are the products of that education. But it also suggests we should be highly concerned about the accuracy of the information sex educators are handing out.
A second concern raised by this survey is the prominent shift in attitudes towards casual sex. One in four women has what is popularly called a "friend with benefits" (a casual sex partner with no formal relationship or expectations), and 16 per cent of these never use condoms in such situations.
This is the product of our latest sexual revolution: a 'hook-up' culture, where the relationship norm is no dating or commitments; just sex. It seems sex has been recast as a recreational activity, leading one American writer to call it "the new midnight basketball."
Naturally, this attitude has led to an unprecedented epidemic of STDs. Yet sex educators refuse to respond by encouraging changes in sexual behaviour. Instead, they have tweaked the "safe sex" moniker to "safer sex" and worked with Planned Parenthood to change the nasty term "STD" to a more friendly "STI" (sexually transmitted infection) in an effort to alleviate young peoples' worries about STDs.
But STDs aren't always curable, they can recur throughout a lifetime, and they have been implicated in causing infertility, pelvic inflammatory disease and the vast majority of the cases of cervical cancer. That's why I refuse to follow suit and falsely communicate the idea that STD infections can easily be cured without any serious or lasting consequences.
Our teens leave high school with more knowledge about sexuality and greater access to birth control than ever before. Yet, somehow, they aren't getting the right message.
One of the most telling stories about attitudes toward sex and how we should respond is a 1993 news story about a high school athletic clique called the Spur Posse.
California police laid rape charges against eight of the elite athletes when it was discovered the group had a competition that awarded a point each time the members had sex with a different girl. The leader had 66 points.
The heart of the problem was revealed when one of the arrested teens told The New York Times, "They pass out condoms, teach sex education and pregnancy-this and pregnancy-that. But they don't teach us any rules."
We expect teens to enter the adult world of sexuality without any rules or expectations -- other than to wear a condom.
Evidently, the biggest problem with sex education may be what we aren't saying to our kids.
Susan Martinuk's column appears every Friday.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Susan Martinuk
For The Calgary Herald
Friday, December 28, 2007
A Leger Marketing survey on the sexual attitudes of Canada's young women suggests our current approach to sex education isn't working.
Comprehensive, no-holds barred sex education programs were supposed to produce women who are knowledgeable, confident and capable of making smart sexual decisions.
But the survey reveals a very different product: A generation who are sloppy and unknowledgeable about birth control, and relatively unconcerned about risky sexual behaviours.
Despite being pummelled with the 'always use a condom' philosophy, one in five women (aged 16-24) never use condoms. Age and maturity don't matter much, as condom use declines with age. Surprisingly, 23 to 24 year-olds are more likely to not use them than their younger counterparts.
About 90 per cent of these "one in five" are/have been on oral contraceptives (OCs). But that's of little comfort, since they apparently believe that OCs are capable of protecting them against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).
If this data is concerning, so is its interpretation by the so-called experts. The Canada-wide news story quoted Saleema Noon, a Vancouver-based, private sexual-health educator. The statistics on birth control pills set off alarm bells for her -- but not for reasons you might think. Her great concern is that 71 per cent of women aren't committed to any particular brand of OC and are open to switching.
The market is about to be flooded by generic OCs. Without a strong commitment to brand-name contraceptives, Noon believes young women will be attracted to the cheaper generic pills that may have different side effects and "haven't been subjected to the rigorous testing" of brand-name pills. As such, she reminds young people it is their "right" to "specifically ask for that brand name" product, and encourages them to stick to it, regardless of price or recommendations of health professionals.
But her worries are false and misleading. Generic drugs have the exact same chemistry as brand-name drugs, and Noon should know that. (Perhaps we should be asking which pharmaceutical companies are supporting Noon and her sales pitch for brand-name products.)
If prominent educators are passing on the wrong information about OCs, it explains some of the confusion exhibited by those who are the products of that education. But it also suggests we should be highly concerned about the accuracy of the information sex educators are handing out.
A second concern raised by this survey is the prominent shift in attitudes towards casual sex. One in four women has what is popularly called a "friend with benefits" (a casual sex partner with no formal relationship or expectations), and 16 per cent of these never use condoms in such situations.
This is the product of our latest sexual revolution: a 'hook-up' culture, where the relationship norm is no dating or commitments; just sex. It seems sex has been recast as a recreational activity, leading one American writer to call it "the new midnight basketball."
Naturally, this attitude has led to an unprecedented epidemic of STDs. Yet sex educators refuse to respond by encouraging changes in sexual behaviour. Instead, they have tweaked the "safe sex" moniker to "safer sex" and worked with Planned Parenthood to change the nasty term "STD" to a more friendly "STI" (sexually transmitted infection) in an effort to alleviate young peoples' worries about STDs.
But STDs aren't always curable, they can recur throughout a lifetime, and they have been implicated in causing infertility, pelvic inflammatory disease and the vast majority of the cases of cervical cancer. That's why I refuse to follow suit and falsely communicate the idea that STD infections can easily be cured without any serious or lasting consequences.
Our teens leave high school with more knowledge about sexuality and greater access to birth control than ever before. Yet, somehow, they aren't getting the right message.
One of the most telling stories about attitudes toward sex and how we should respond is a 1993 news story about a high school athletic clique called the Spur Posse.
California police laid rape charges against eight of the elite athletes when it was discovered the group had a competition that awarded a point each time the members had sex with a different girl. The leader had 66 points.
The heart of the problem was revealed when one of the arrested teens told The New York Times, "They pass out condoms, teach sex education and pregnancy-this and pregnancy-that. But they don't teach us any rules."
We expect teens to enter the adult world of sexuality without any rules or expectations -- other than to wear a condom.
Evidently, the biggest problem with sex education may be what we aren't saying to our kids.
Susan Martinuk's column appears every Friday.
© The Calgary Herald 2007
January 13, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
Sex and the Teenage Girl
By CAITLIN FLANAGAN
Los Angeles
THE movie “Juno” is a fairy tale about a pregnant teenager who decides to have her baby, place it for adoption and then get on with her life. For the most part, the tone of the movie is comedic and jolly, but there is a moment when Juno tells her father about her condition, and he shakes his head in disappointment and says, “I thought you were the kind of girl who knew when to say when.”
Female viewers flinch when he says it, because his words lay bare the bitterly unfair truth of sexuality: female desire can bring with it a form of punishment no man can begin to imagine, and so it is one appetite women and girls must always regard with caution. Because Juno let her guard down and had a single sexual experience with a sweet, well-intentioned boy, she alone is left with this ordeal of sorrow and public shame.
In the movie, the moment passes. Juno finds a yuppie couple eager for a baby, and when the woman tries to entice her with the promise of an open adoption, the girl shakes her head adamantly: “Can’t we just kick it old school? I could just put the baby in a basket and send it your way. You know, like Moses in the reeds.”
It’s a hilarious moment, and the sentiment turns out to be genuine. The final scene of the movie shows Juno and her boyfriend returned to their carefree adolescence, the baby — safely in the hands of his rapturous and responsible new mother — all but forgotten. Because I’m old enough now that teenage movie characters evoke a primarily maternal response in me (my question during the film wasn’t “What would I do in that situation?” but “What would I do if my daughter were in that situation?”), the last scene brought tears to my eyes. To see a young daughter, faced with the terrible fact of a pregnancy, unscathed by it and completely her old self again was magical.
And that’s why “Juno” is a fairy tale. As any woman who has ever chosen (or been forced) to kick it old school can tell you, surrendering a baby whom you will never know comes with a steep and lifelong cost. Nor is an abortion psychologically or physically simple. It is an invasive and frightening procedure, and for some adolescent girls it constitutes part of their first gynecological exam. I know grown women who’ve wept bitterly after abortions, no matter how sound their decisions were. How much harder are these procedures for girls, whose moral and emotional universe is just taking shape?
Even the much-discussed pregnancy of 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears reveals the rudely unfair toll that a few minutes of pleasure can exact on a girl. The very fact that the gossip magazines are still debating the identity of the father proves again that the burden of sex is the woman’s to bear. He has a chance to maintain his privacy, but if she becomes pregnant by mistake, soon all the world will know.
Pregnancy robs a teenager of her girlhood. This stark fact is one reason girls used to be so carefully guarded and protected — in a system that at once limited their horizons and safeguarded them from devastating consequences. The feminist historian Joan Jacobs Brumberg has written that “however prudish and ‘uptight’ the Victorians were, our ancestors had a deep commitment to girls.”
We, too, have a deep commitment to girls, and ours centers not on protecting their chastity, but on supporting their ability to compete with boys, to be free — perhaps for the first time in history — from the restraints that kept women from achieving on the same level. Now we have to ask ourselves this question: Does the full enfranchisement of girls depend on their being sexually liberated? And if it does, can we somehow change or diminish among the very young the trauma of pregnancy, the occasional result of even safe sex?
Biology is destiny, and the brutally unfair outcome that adolescent sexuality can produce will never change. Twenty years ago, I taught high school in a town near New Orleans. There was a girls’ bathroom next to my classroom, which was more convenient for me than the faculty one on the other side of campus. In the last stall, carved deeply into the metal box reserved for used sanitary napkins, was the single word “Please.”
Whoever had written it had taken a long time; the word was etched so deeply into the metal that she must have worked on it over several days, hiding in there on hall passes or study breaks, desperate. I never knew who wrote it, or when, but I always knew exactly what that anonymous girl meant. When I looked out over the girls moving through the hallways between classes, I wondered if she was among them, and I hoped that her prayer had been answered.
Caitlin Flanagan, the author of “To Hell With All That,” is working on a book about the emotional lives of pubescent girls.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/opini ... nted=print
Op-Ed Contributor
Sex and the Teenage Girl
By CAITLIN FLANAGAN
Los Angeles
THE movie “Juno” is a fairy tale about a pregnant teenager who decides to have her baby, place it for adoption and then get on with her life. For the most part, the tone of the movie is comedic and jolly, but there is a moment when Juno tells her father about her condition, and he shakes his head in disappointment and says, “I thought you were the kind of girl who knew when to say when.”
Female viewers flinch when he says it, because his words lay bare the bitterly unfair truth of sexuality: female desire can bring with it a form of punishment no man can begin to imagine, and so it is one appetite women and girls must always regard with caution. Because Juno let her guard down and had a single sexual experience with a sweet, well-intentioned boy, she alone is left with this ordeal of sorrow and public shame.
In the movie, the moment passes. Juno finds a yuppie couple eager for a baby, and when the woman tries to entice her with the promise of an open adoption, the girl shakes her head adamantly: “Can’t we just kick it old school? I could just put the baby in a basket and send it your way. You know, like Moses in the reeds.”
It’s a hilarious moment, and the sentiment turns out to be genuine. The final scene of the movie shows Juno and her boyfriend returned to their carefree adolescence, the baby — safely in the hands of his rapturous and responsible new mother — all but forgotten. Because I’m old enough now that teenage movie characters evoke a primarily maternal response in me (my question during the film wasn’t “What would I do in that situation?” but “What would I do if my daughter were in that situation?”), the last scene brought tears to my eyes. To see a young daughter, faced with the terrible fact of a pregnancy, unscathed by it and completely her old self again was magical.
And that’s why “Juno” is a fairy tale. As any woman who has ever chosen (or been forced) to kick it old school can tell you, surrendering a baby whom you will never know comes with a steep and lifelong cost. Nor is an abortion psychologically or physically simple. It is an invasive and frightening procedure, and for some adolescent girls it constitutes part of their first gynecological exam. I know grown women who’ve wept bitterly after abortions, no matter how sound their decisions were. How much harder are these procedures for girls, whose moral and emotional universe is just taking shape?
Even the much-discussed pregnancy of 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears reveals the rudely unfair toll that a few minutes of pleasure can exact on a girl. The very fact that the gossip magazines are still debating the identity of the father proves again that the burden of sex is the woman’s to bear. He has a chance to maintain his privacy, but if she becomes pregnant by mistake, soon all the world will know.
Pregnancy robs a teenager of her girlhood. This stark fact is one reason girls used to be so carefully guarded and protected — in a system that at once limited their horizons and safeguarded them from devastating consequences. The feminist historian Joan Jacobs Brumberg has written that “however prudish and ‘uptight’ the Victorians were, our ancestors had a deep commitment to girls.”
We, too, have a deep commitment to girls, and ours centers not on protecting their chastity, but on supporting their ability to compete with boys, to be free — perhaps for the first time in history — from the restraints that kept women from achieving on the same level. Now we have to ask ourselves this question: Does the full enfranchisement of girls depend on their being sexually liberated? And if it does, can we somehow change or diminish among the very young the trauma of pregnancy, the occasional result of even safe sex?
Biology is destiny, and the brutally unfair outcome that adolescent sexuality can produce will never change. Twenty years ago, I taught high school in a town near New Orleans. There was a girls’ bathroom next to my classroom, which was more convenient for me than the faculty one on the other side of campus. In the last stall, carved deeply into the metal box reserved for used sanitary napkins, was the single word “Please.”
Whoever had written it had taken a long time; the word was etched so deeply into the metal that she must have worked on it over several days, hiding in there on hall passes or study breaks, desperate. I never knew who wrote it, or when, but I always knew exactly what that anonymous girl meant. When I looked out over the girls moving through the hallways between classes, I wondered if she was among them, and I hoped that her prayer had been answered.
Caitlin Flanagan, the author of “To Hell With All That,” is working on a book about the emotional lives of pubescent girls.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/opini ... nted=print
Babies born to teen dads face challenges
Canwest News Service
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Babies born to teenage fathers are more susceptible to a range of birth problems including prematurity, low birth weight and death within the first year of birth, according to an Ottawa study to be published today in the European fertility journal Human Reproduction.
On the other hand, fathers more than 40, and even more than 50, showed no elevated risk of the same problems.
"It's a novel finding," said Dr. Mark Walker, a high-risk obstetrician and a co-author of the study. "To be honest, I thought older men would have been the association rather than younger men."
The findings could lead to new standards in identifying high-risk pregnancies, Walker added. "For pregnancies conceived where the partner is young, it increases our awareness of complications that can occur, and may behoove us to increase our surveillance."
The joint study by the Ottawa Health Research Institute, the University of Ottawa and the Ottawa Hospital was unique in so closely examining the role of paternal age in the health of a pregnancy while tightly controlling the age of the mothers, said Dr. Shi Wu Wen, a perinatal epidemiologist and another of the study's authors.
In what the research team believes is the largest-ever study of its kind , more than 2.6 million U.S. birth records were examined involving women in their 20s with no childbearing history who gave birth between 1995 and 2000.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Canwest News Service
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Babies born to teenage fathers are more susceptible to a range of birth problems including prematurity, low birth weight and death within the first year of birth, according to an Ottawa study to be published today in the European fertility journal Human Reproduction.
On the other hand, fathers more than 40, and even more than 50, showed no elevated risk of the same problems.
"It's a novel finding," said Dr. Mark Walker, a high-risk obstetrician and a co-author of the study. "To be honest, I thought older men would have been the association rather than younger men."
The findings could lead to new standards in identifying high-risk pregnancies, Walker added. "For pregnancies conceived where the partner is young, it increases our awareness of complications that can occur, and may behoove us to increase our surveillance."
The joint study by the Ottawa Health Research Institute, the University of Ottawa and the Ottawa Hospital was unique in so closely examining the role of paternal age in the health of a pregnancy while tightly controlling the age of the mothers, said Dr. Shi Wu Wen, a perinatal epidemiologist and another of the study's authors.
In what the research team believes is the largest-ever study of its kind , more than 2.6 million U.S. birth records were examined involving women in their 20s with no childbearing history who gave birth between 1995 and 2000.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
One big 'sex talk' not enough: researchers
Reuters
Monday, March 03, 2008
Parents should consider having repeated discussions with their children about many aspects of sex, instead of one "big talk" on impersonal topics linked to sexuality such as puberty, researchers said Monday.
"Parents who take a checklist approach to broadening their sexual discussion with their children are unlikely to have as great an influence . . . as parents who introduce new sexual topics and then develop them through repeated discussions," said their report published in the journal Pediatrics.
The study, entitled Beyond the Big Talk, used written surveys given to 312 children in Southern California aged 11 to 15 to assess how frequent and candid their conversations were with their parents about sex.
The more parents talked with their children, the closer their relationships, wrote researchers Steven Martino and colleagues at the Rand Corporation.
The relationships also benefited when the discussions moved beyond "safe" or impersonal subjects such as puberty, reproduction and sexually transmitted diseases to more private topics such as masturbation and how sex feels.
The surveys looked at children's attitudes toward their parents over a one-year period and asked about how many of 22 sexual topics were discussed.
Mothers tended to discuss twice as many sexual topics with their children -- 12 -- as fathers did, the study said.
The report cited earlier studies that showed children who were communicated with were more likely to delay intercourse and, if they chose to have sex, to use contraception and have fewer partners.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Reuters
Monday, March 03, 2008
Parents should consider having repeated discussions with their children about many aspects of sex, instead of one "big talk" on impersonal topics linked to sexuality such as puberty, researchers said Monday.
"Parents who take a checklist approach to broadening their sexual discussion with their children are unlikely to have as great an influence . . . as parents who introduce new sexual topics and then develop them through repeated discussions," said their report published in the journal Pediatrics.
The study, entitled Beyond the Big Talk, used written surveys given to 312 children in Southern California aged 11 to 15 to assess how frequent and candid their conversations were with their parents about sex.
The more parents talked with their children, the closer their relationships, wrote researchers Steven Martino and colleagues at the Rand Corporation.
The relationships also benefited when the discussions moved beyond "safe" or impersonal subjects such as puberty, reproduction and sexually transmitted diseases to more private topics such as masturbation and how sex feels.
The surveys looked at children's attitudes toward their parents over a one-year period and asked about how many of 22 sexual topics were discussed.
Mothers tended to discuss twice as many sexual topics with their children -- 12 -- as fathers did, the study said.
The report cited earlier studies that showed children who were communicated with were more likely to delay intercourse and, if they chose to have sex, to use contraception and have fewer partners.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
March 12, 2008
Sex Infections Found in Quarter of Teenage Girls
By LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN
The first national study of four common sexually transmitted diseases among girls and young women has found that one in four are infected with at least one of the diseases, federal health officials reported Tuesday.
Nearly half the African-Americans in the study of teenagers ages 14 to 19 were infected with at least one of the diseases monitored in the study — human papillomavirus (HPV), chlamydia, genital herpes and trichomoniasis, a common parasite.
The 50 percent figure compared with 20 percent of white teenagers, health officials and researchers said at a news conference at a scientific meeting in Chicago.
The two most common sexually transmitted diseases, or S.T.D.’s, among all the participants tested were HPV, at 18 percent, and chlamydia, at 4 percent, according to the analysis, part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Each disease can be serious in its own way. HPV, for example, can cause cancer and genital warts.
Among the infected women, 15 percent had more than one of the diseases.
Women may be unaware they are infected. But the diseases, which are infections caused by bacteria, viruses and parasites, can produce acute symptoms like irritating vaginal discharge, painful pelvic inflammatory disease and potentially fatal ectopic pregnancy. The infections can also lead to longterm ailments like infertility and cervical cancer.
The survey tested for specific HPV strains linked to genital warts and cervical cancer.
Officials of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the findings underscored the need to strengthen screening, vaccination and other prevention measures for the diseases, which are among the highest public health priorities.
About 19 million new sexually transmitted infections occur each year among all age groups in the United States.
“High S.T.D. infection rates among young women, particularly young African-American women, are clear signs that we must continue developing ways to reach those most at risk,” said Dr. John M. Douglas Jr., who directs the centers’ division of S.T.D. prevention.
The president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Cecile Richards, said the new findings “emphasize the need for real comprehensive sex education.”
“The national policy of promoting abstinence-only programs is a $1.5 billion failure,” Ms. Richards said, “and teenage girls are paying the real price.”
Although earlier annual surveys have tested for a single sexually transmitted disease in a specified population, this is the first time the national study has collected data on all the most common sexual diseases in adolescent women at the same time. It is also the first time the study measured human papillomavirus.
Dr. Douglas said that because the new survey was based on direct testing, it was more reliable than analyses derived from data that doctors and clinics sent to the diseases center through state and local health departments.
“What we found is alarming,” said Dr. Sara Forhan, a researcher at the centers and the lead author of the study.
Dr. Forhan added that the study showed “how fast the S.T.D. prevalence appears.”
“Far too many young women are at risk for the serious health effects of untreated S.T.D.’s, ” she said.
The centers conducts the annual study, which asks a representative sample of the household population a wide range of health questions. The analysis was based on information collected in the 2003-4 survey.
Extrapolating from the findings, Dr. Forhan said 3.2 million teenage women were infected with at least one of the four diseases.
The 838 participants in the study were chosen at random with standard statistical techniques. Of the women asked, 96 percent agreed to submit vaginal swabs for testing.
The findings and specific treatment recommendations were available to the participants calling a password-protected telephone line. Three reminders were sent to participants who did not call.
Health officials recommend treatment for all sex partners of individuals diagnosed with curable sexually transmitted diseases. One promising approach to reach that goal is for doctors who treat infected women to provide or prescribe the same treatment for their partners, Dr. Douglas said. The goal is to encourage men who may not have a physician or who have no symptoms and may be reluctant to seek care to be treated without a doctor’s visit.
He also urged infected women to be retested three months after treatment to detect possible reinfection and to treat it.
Dr. Forhan said she did not know how many participants received their test results.
Federal health officials recommend annual screening tests to detect chlamydia for sexually active women younger than 25. The disease agency also recommends that women ages 11 to 26 be fully vaccinated against HPV.
The Food and Drug Administration has said in a report that latex condoms are “highly effective” at preventing infection by chlamydia, trichomoniasis, H.I.V., gonorrhea and hepatitis B.
The agency noted that condoms seemed less effective against genital herpes and syphilis. Protection against human papillomavirus “is partial at best,” the report said.
Sex Infections Found in Quarter of Teenage Girls
By LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN
The first national study of four common sexually transmitted diseases among girls and young women has found that one in four are infected with at least one of the diseases, federal health officials reported Tuesday.
Nearly half the African-Americans in the study of teenagers ages 14 to 19 were infected with at least one of the diseases monitored in the study — human papillomavirus (HPV), chlamydia, genital herpes and trichomoniasis, a common parasite.
The 50 percent figure compared with 20 percent of white teenagers, health officials and researchers said at a news conference at a scientific meeting in Chicago.
The two most common sexually transmitted diseases, or S.T.D.’s, among all the participants tested were HPV, at 18 percent, and chlamydia, at 4 percent, according to the analysis, part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Each disease can be serious in its own way. HPV, for example, can cause cancer and genital warts.
Among the infected women, 15 percent had more than one of the diseases.
Women may be unaware they are infected. But the diseases, which are infections caused by bacteria, viruses and parasites, can produce acute symptoms like irritating vaginal discharge, painful pelvic inflammatory disease and potentially fatal ectopic pregnancy. The infections can also lead to longterm ailments like infertility and cervical cancer.
The survey tested for specific HPV strains linked to genital warts and cervical cancer.
Officials of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the findings underscored the need to strengthen screening, vaccination and other prevention measures for the diseases, which are among the highest public health priorities.
About 19 million new sexually transmitted infections occur each year among all age groups in the United States.
“High S.T.D. infection rates among young women, particularly young African-American women, are clear signs that we must continue developing ways to reach those most at risk,” said Dr. John M. Douglas Jr., who directs the centers’ division of S.T.D. prevention.
The president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Cecile Richards, said the new findings “emphasize the need for real comprehensive sex education.”
“The national policy of promoting abstinence-only programs is a $1.5 billion failure,” Ms. Richards said, “and teenage girls are paying the real price.”
Although earlier annual surveys have tested for a single sexually transmitted disease in a specified population, this is the first time the national study has collected data on all the most common sexual diseases in adolescent women at the same time. It is also the first time the study measured human papillomavirus.
Dr. Douglas said that because the new survey was based on direct testing, it was more reliable than analyses derived from data that doctors and clinics sent to the diseases center through state and local health departments.
“What we found is alarming,” said Dr. Sara Forhan, a researcher at the centers and the lead author of the study.
Dr. Forhan added that the study showed “how fast the S.T.D. prevalence appears.”
“Far too many young women are at risk for the serious health effects of untreated S.T.D.’s, ” she said.
The centers conducts the annual study, which asks a representative sample of the household population a wide range of health questions. The analysis was based on information collected in the 2003-4 survey.
Extrapolating from the findings, Dr. Forhan said 3.2 million teenage women were infected with at least one of the four diseases.
The 838 participants in the study were chosen at random with standard statistical techniques. Of the women asked, 96 percent agreed to submit vaginal swabs for testing.
The findings and specific treatment recommendations were available to the participants calling a password-protected telephone line. Three reminders were sent to participants who did not call.
Health officials recommend treatment for all sex partners of individuals diagnosed with curable sexually transmitted diseases. One promising approach to reach that goal is for doctors who treat infected women to provide or prescribe the same treatment for their partners, Dr. Douglas said. The goal is to encourage men who may not have a physician or who have no symptoms and may be reluctant to seek care to be treated without a doctor’s visit.
He also urged infected women to be retested three months after treatment to detect possible reinfection and to treat it.
Dr. Forhan said she did not know how many participants received their test results.
Federal health officials recommend annual screening tests to detect chlamydia for sexually active women younger than 25. The disease agency also recommends that women ages 11 to 26 be fully vaccinated against HPV.
The Food and Drug Administration has said in a report that latex condoms are “highly effective” at preventing infection by chlamydia, trichomoniasis, H.I.V., gonorrhea and hepatitis B.
The agency noted that condoms seemed less effective against genital herpes and syphilis. Protection against human papillomavirus “is partial at best,” the report said.
March 17, 2008
Editorial
One in Four Girls
Teenage girls and their parents need to read the latest government study of sexually transmitted diseases. The infections are so prevalent they are hard to avoid once a girl becomes sexually active. One in four girls ages 14 to 19 is infected with at least one of four common diseases. Among African-American girls in the study, almost half were infected.
The data, drawn from a sample of 838 girls who participated in a broad national survey in 2003-4, was presented last week by researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By far the most common of the four S.T.D.’s was the human papillomavirus, or HPV, which infected 18 percent of the girls. Chlamydia infected 4 percent, trichomoniasis — a common parasite — 2.5 percent, and genital herpes 2 percent.
The study did not look at such feared diseases as H.I.V./AIDS, syphilis or gonorrhea, but the four it did look at are worrisome enough. Although most HPV infections cause no symptoms and clear the body in less than a year, persistent HPV can cause cervical cancer and genital warts. S.T.D.’s can cause infertility, pelvic inflammatory disease and other painful symptoms.
It will not be easy for sexually active teenagers to avoid any danger. Even among girls who said they had had only a single sexual partner, 20 percent were infected. With more than three million teenage girls infected, it is imperative to find ways to protect others.
The new findings strengthen the case for providing HPV vaccine to young girls and for regular screening of sexually active girls to detect infection. There is also a clear need to strengthen programs in sex education. Exhortations to practice abstinence go only so far.
Teenage girls who are sexually active need access to contraceptives and counseling. They need to understand that the numbers are against them and that a serious infection is but a careless sexual encounter away.
Editorial
One in Four Girls
Teenage girls and their parents need to read the latest government study of sexually transmitted diseases. The infections are so prevalent they are hard to avoid once a girl becomes sexually active. One in four girls ages 14 to 19 is infected with at least one of four common diseases. Among African-American girls in the study, almost half were infected.
The data, drawn from a sample of 838 girls who participated in a broad national survey in 2003-4, was presented last week by researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By far the most common of the four S.T.D.’s was the human papillomavirus, or HPV, which infected 18 percent of the girls. Chlamydia infected 4 percent, trichomoniasis — a common parasite — 2.5 percent, and genital herpes 2 percent.
The study did not look at such feared diseases as H.I.V./AIDS, syphilis or gonorrhea, but the four it did look at are worrisome enough. Although most HPV infections cause no symptoms and clear the body in less than a year, persistent HPV can cause cervical cancer and genital warts. S.T.D.’s can cause infertility, pelvic inflammatory disease and other painful symptoms.
It will not be easy for sexually active teenagers to avoid any danger. Even among girls who said they had had only a single sexual partner, 20 percent were infected. With more than three million teenage girls infected, it is imperative to find ways to protect others.
The new findings strengthen the case for providing HPV vaccine to young girls and for regular screening of sexually active girls to detect infection. There is also a clear need to strengthen programs in sex education. Exhortations to practice abstinence go only so far.
Teenage girls who are sexually active need access to contraceptives and counseling. They need to understand that the numbers are against them and that a serious infection is but a careless sexual encounter away.
Shield kids from sexual deviance: Pope
Pontiff says media, church, parents all have roles to play
Sheldon Alberts
Canwest News Service
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Pope Benedict on Wednesday upbraided Roman Catholic bishops in the United States for sometimes handling the church's sex abuse scandal "very badly," while telling Americans they must do more to protect children from the "crude manipulation of sexuality" now prevalent in the country.
In a speech Wednesday evening to Catholic bishops in Washington, the pontiff for the second day condemned the "gravely immoral behaviour" of U.S. priests whose abuse of children has cost the church more than $2 billion in settlements and scarred its reputation.
But he also appealed for Roman Catholic leaders in the U.S. to redouble efforts to open the "minds and hearts to moral truth" by vigorously promoting marriage and family life.
"It is your God-given responsibility as pastors to bind up the wounds caused by every breach of trust, to foster healing, to promote reconciliation and to reach out with loving concern to those so seriously wronged," he said in his speech at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.
It was important to rebuild the trust of Americans, the Pope said, because Catholic bishops have a vital role to play in educating children on "proper" sexuality and urging secular society to do so as well.
He said parents, teachers, the media and the entertainment industry must also take more responsibility to shield American children from sexual deviance.
"What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes?" he asked.
"Children deserve to grow up with a healthy understanding of sexuality and its proper place in human relationships . . . They should be spared the degrading manifestations and the crude manipulations of sexuality so prevalent today."
Benedict's sober remarks came at the end of his first full day in the U.S., and followed a more celebratory meeting at the White House with U.S. President George W. Bush.
The pontiff and the president prayed together for the institution of the family during a 45-minute private meeting at the White House, a Vatican spokesman said.
During public remarks before an estimated 10,000 people on the White House lawn, Benedict also urged the United States to recommit to "patient efforts of international diplomacy."
The pontiff made no direct mention of his personal opposition to the Iraq war, an area of disagreement with Bush.
Instead, he used his meeting with the president to gently prod the president to more enthusiastically embrace multilateralism.
"On this, the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the need for global solidarity is as urgent as ever," he said.
Bush, in his own remarks welcoming Benedict to the U.S., urged Americans to follow the example of faith and conservative morality set by the Pope.
The president complained about the "dictatorship" of moral relativism in liberal society and said he hoped the pontiff's presence would remind Americans about the sanctity of human life.
"In a world where some treat life as something to be debased and discarded, we need your message that all human life is sacred," the president said.
His comment appeared to be a reference to the Catholic church's opposition to abortion, one of the issues on which Bush and Benedict firmly agree.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Pontiff says media, church, parents all have roles to play
Sheldon Alberts
Canwest News Service
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Pope Benedict on Wednesday upbraided Roman Catholic bishops in the United States for sometimes handling the church's sex abuse scandal "very badly," while telling Americans they must do more to protect children from the "crude manipulation of sexuality" now prevalent in the country.
In a speech Wednesday evening to Catholic bishops in Washington, the pontiff for the second day condemned the "gravely immoral behaviour" of U.S. priests whose abuse of children has cost the church more than $2 billion in settlements and scarred its reputation.
But he also appealed for Roman Catholic leaders in the U.S. to redouble efforts to open the "minds and hearts to moral truth" by vigorously promoting marriage and family life.
"It is your God-given responsibility as pastors to bind up the wounds caused by every breach of trust, to foster healing, to promote reconciliation and to reach out with loving concern to those so seriously wronged," he said in his speech at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.
It was important to rebuild the trust of Americans, the Pope said, because Catholic bishops have a vital role to play in educating children on "proper" sexuality and urging secular society to do so as well.
He said parents, teachers, the media and the entertainment industry must also take more responsibility to shield American children from sexual deviance.
"What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes?" he asked.
"Children deserve to grow up with a healthy understanding of sexuality and its proper place in human relationships . . . They should be spared the degrading manifestations and the crude manipulations of sexuality so prevalent today."
Benedict's sober remarks came at the end of his first full day in the U.S., and followed a more celebratory meeting at the White House with U.S. President George W. Bush.
The pontiff and the president prayed together for the institution of the family during a 45-minute private meeting at the White House, a Vatican spokesman said.
During public remarks before an estimated 10,000 people on the White House lawn, Benedict also urged the United States to recommit to "patient efforts of international diplomacy."
The pontiff made no direct mention of his personal opposition to the Iraq war, an area of disagreement with Bush.
Instead, he used his meeting with the president to gently prod the president to more enthusiastically embrace multilateralism.
"On this, the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the need for global solidarity is as urgent as ever," he said.
Bush, in his own remarks welcoming Benedict to the U.S., urged Americans to follow the example of faith and conservative morality set by the Pope.
The president complained about the "dictatorship" of moral relativism in liberal society and said he hoped the pontiff's presence would remind Americans about the sanctity of human life.
"In a world where some treat life as something to be debased and discarded, we need your message that all human life is sacred," the president said.
His comment appeared to be a reference to the Catholic church's opposition to abortion, one of the issues on which Bush and Benedict firmly agree.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Catholic schools wary of vaccine
Cancer-fighting shot stirs sex controversy
Michelle Lang
Calgary Herald
Saturday, June 14, 2008
CREDIT: Herald Archive, Reuters
Some Alberta school districts are opposed to a provincial HPV inoculation program for Grade 5 girls.
Some Alberta school districts and church leaders are opposed to vaccinating Catholic schoolgirls against a sexually-transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, fearing it will promote premarital sex.
As the Alberta government prepares to inoculate Grade 5 girls against human papilloma virus beginning in September, an official with the Catholic Archdiocese of Edmonton argues Catholic schools should not participate in the program.
Meanwhile, at least one Catholic school district -- the Holy Spirit Catholic School Division in Lethbridge -- said Friday it will debate whether to allow the HPV vaccinations in its schools.
The Alberta government announced the voluntary program this week, saying the vaccine can prevent 70 per cent of cervical cancers by targeting four strains of HPV.
"While I believe the program is well intended, it may prove to be counterproductive," said Paul Quist, director of marriage and family life with the Edmonton archdiocese.
"It's a tacit approval of premature, premarital sex. . . . I think for the religious reasons that Catholic schools ought not to participate in this."
Alberta Health officials said they did not consult with Catholic leaders before announcing the vaccine would be delivered in schools, but argued the program is an important public health issue.
"This is a health decision. It's about saving lives," said Howard May, a spokesman with Alberta Health.
Cervical cancer kills 40 Alberta women every year.
The debate comes as several Ontario Catholic school boards consider whether to participate in that province's HPV vaccination program. Earlier this month, the Halton District Catholic School Board voted against allowing public health nurses into their schools to give Grade 8 girls the vaccine.
The Alberta government announced Thursday it would offer the HPV vaccine to Grade 5 girls beginning in September, while extending the program to Grade 9 girls between 2009 and 2012.
The province said the program will be delivered in schools.
Alberta Health's May said the program is voluntary and parents will be asked for their consent before students receive a vaccine.
In Lethbridge, the local Catholic school division said it was concerned about the announcement and would have to speak with church leaders about whether to allow the program at its schools.
"We believe in education that pursues an understanding of chastity," said David Keohane, superintendent at the Holy Spirit Catholic School Division, which has 4,300 students. "If they live a life faithful to that, they don't need to be pursuing an HPV vaccine."
But other districts, like Edmonton Catholic Schools, support the program.
"We will treat it like any other vaccine," said spokeswoman Lori Nagy.
Calgary Catholic School District representatives said administration has not discussed the issue with church leaders.
While some are raising concerns about the program, the Alberta Medical Association said Friday the vaccine is safe and effective and applauded the province for introducing the program.
"We need to focus once again on the health of children and women," said Dr. Darryl LaBuick, president of the association. "Cervical cancer doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion."
Meanwhile, at least one other Alberta religious group is endorsing the vaccine. The Muslim Council of Calgary said the program is preventative medicine.
"We're in favour of anything that reduces the risk of a slow and painful death," said David Liepert, a spokesman for the council.
"The vaccine doesn't stop us from teaching our children what's right and wrong."
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Cancer-fighting shot stirs sex controversy
Michelle Lang
Calgary Herald
Saturday, June 14, 2008
CREDIT: Herald Archive, Reuters
Some Alberta school districts are opposed to a provincial HPV inoculation program for Grade 5 girls.
Some Alberta school districts and church leaders are opposed to vaccinating Catholic schoolgirls against a sexually-transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, fearing it will promote premarital sex.
As the Alberta government prepares to inoculate Grade 5 girls against human papilloma virus beginning in September, an official with the Catholic Archdiocese of Edmonton argues Catholic schools should not participate in the program.
Meanwhile, at least one Catholic school district -- the Holy Spirit Catholic School Division in Lethbridge -- said Friday it will debate whether to allow the HPV vaccinations in its schools.
The Alberta government announced the voluntary program this week, saying the vaccine can prevent 70 per cent of cervical cancers by targeting four strains of HPV.
"While I believe the program is well intended, it may prove to be counterproductive," said Paul Quist, director of marriage and family life with the Edmonton archdiocese.
"It's a tacit approval of premature, premarital sex. . . . I think for the religious reasons that Catholic schools ought not to participate in this."
Alberta Health officials said they did not consult with Catholic leaders before announcing the vaccine would be delivered in schools, but argued the program is an important public health issue.
"This is a health decision. It's about saving lives," said Howard May, a spokesman with Alberta Health.
Cervical cancer kills 40 Alberta women every year.
The debate comes as several Ontario Catholic school boards consider whether to participate in that province's HPV vaccination program. Earlier this month, the Halton District Catholic School Board voted against allowing public health nurses into their schools to give Grade 8 girls the vaccine.
The Alberta government announced Thursday it would offer the HPV vaccine to Grade 5 girls beginning in September, while extending the program to Grade 9 girls between 2009 and 2012.
The province said the program will be delivered in schools.
Alberta Health's May said the program is voluntary and parents will be asked for their consent before students receive a vaccine.
In Lethbridge, the local Catholic school division said it was concerned about the announcement and would have to speak with church leaders about whether to allow the program at its schools.
"We believe in education that pursues an understanding of chastity," said David Keohane, superintendent at the Holy Spirit Catholic School Division, which has 4,300 students. "If they live a life faithful to that, they don't need to be pursuing an HPV vaccine."
But other districts, like Edmonton Catholic Schools, support the program.
"We will treat it like any other vaccine," said spokeswoman Lori Nagy.
Calgary Catholic School District representatives said administration has not discussed the issue with church leaders.
While some are raising concerns about the program, the Alberta Medical Association said Friday the vaccine is safe and effective and applauded the province for introducing the program.
"We need to focus once again on the health of children and women," said Dr. Darryl LaBuick, president of the association. "Cervical cancer doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion."
Meanwhile, at least one other Alberta religious group is endorsing the vaccine. The Muslim Council of Calgary said the program is preventative medicine.
"We're in favour of anything that reduces the risk of a slow and painful death," said David Liepert, a spokesman for the council.
"The vaccine doesn't stop us from teaching our children what's right and wrong."
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Motherhood a much better option than abortion
Selina Renfrow
For The Calgary Herald
Monday, July 07, 2008
I knew better. I knew better than to have sex without protection. I could have taken that condom out of my pocket and used it.
But I didn't.
At the age of 20 I was pregnant, single and living at home. It took me two months to decide what I was going to do; two months to choose a path for my life.
I chose to be a mother.
Abortion was an option I never considered.
Yes, my Catholic upbringing had an influence on my beliefs. Yes, my parents had an influence, too. But what I believe is that a child is born at the moment of conception. Abortion, to me, is murder. I also believe in being responsible for my actions. I chose to have sex without using any form of birth control. I knew I was risking becoming pregnant or getting a sexually transmitted infection. I'll admit I was naive: I didn't think it would happen to me, but it did -- I was pregnant and I had to deal with it.
I considered adoption. I went to an adoption agency and I spoke with the social worker there. She told me giving up your child for adoption felt like your best friend in the whole world died. It was a huge, emotional roller-coaster that took time to heal from.
I considered motherhood. I've always wanted to be mom. I wanted to give birth to, and adopt, numerous children. These were the dreams of young girl who had no idea what it's like to be a parent.
I chose motherhood because I believe abortion is wrong and adoption too hard. I chose motherhood because I wanted to be a mom and knew I could be a mom, that it was my time. What if I gave up on my chance to be a mother now and I couldn't be a mom later? I didn't want to take that risk. I made my choice.
To hear that Dr. Henry Morgentaler is receiving the Order of Canada is upsetting. I don't particularly care about the order, but I do care that he's being recognized and honoured for his part in having Canada's abortion law overturned by the Supreme Court. To some, he's a hero for championing women's health care. But this confuses me. He made abortion more accessible for women, yes, but how does a quick solution to a much larger problem amount to being an advocate for women's health care?
One good thing about Dr. Morgentaler is that, every time he is in the headlines, the debate about abortion resumes in our newspapers. It has been 20 years since the historic Supreme Court decision. Since then, meaningful debate seems to have been squashed.
Those against abortion have had their voices silenced by many who believe the debate is not relevant. They label anti-abortionist and religious groups as anti-choice, which is not the same thing.
For those who believe in God, we believe that God gave us the freedom of choice. However, just because we have the ability to choose our own path does not mean it is OK to choose the wrong path.
Those who label themselves pro-choice say it's about a woman's right to choose what happens to her body. But a woman already made that choice when she decided to have sex. She can reduce the risk of an unwanted pregnancy by choosing a form of birth control. But no condom, patch or pill is 100 per cent effective.
Having sex can result in creating a child or contracting an STI or both. There are not many people in Canada who can claim ignorance to these facts. Schools, churches, doctors and, most importantly, parents have the responsibility to educate children on sexual health and reproduction.
What Dr. Morgentaler, abortionists and the Canadian government have said by allowing abortion is that it is OK to not want to live with the consequences of your actions, it is OK to be irresponsible. They will allow you an apparently easy way out so you can potentially make the same mistake again.
Education is the only way to prevent women and men from becoming parents unexpectedly.
We need to have a healthy respect for sex. It shouldn't be feared or shunned, nor should it mean nothing.
Twenty years after the Supreme Court struck down Canada's abortion law, we should be ready to move forward together.
Not having a law regarding abortion is not the solution to the problem of not living up to the responsibilities we have.
We are the only western country that does not have an abortion law, and that is not something to be proud of.
As for me, looking into the gorgeous face of my two-year-old daughter is.
Selina Renfrow is an editorial assistant at the Calgary Herald, a Mount Royal College journalism student and the proud mother of a two-year-old daughter.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
****
Men's age affects fertility
Older potential dads face greater difficulty: study
Matthew Coutts
Canwest News Service
Monday, July 07, 2008
TORONTO - The age of the potential father -- not just the mother -- can seriously limit the chances of having a baby later in life, according to a study released today.
While it has long been documented would-be mothers in their mid-30s, or older, face reduced pregnancy rates and increased miscarriages, researchers say this is the strongest proof to date that similar problems are caused by the age of the would-be father in couples that face difficulty conceiving.
Researchers at France's Eylau Centre for Assisted Reproduction monitored 21,239 cases of intrauterine inseminations, an effective type of artificial insemination, in more than 12,000 couples between 2002 and 2006.
They found maternal age was closely associated with a decrease in the pregnancy rate -- 8.9 per cent in women over 35 years, compared with 14.5 per cent in younger women -- as well as a higher miscarriage rate.
"But we also demonstrated that the age of the father was important in the rate of pregnancy, with a negative effect for men over 40," said Stephanie Belloc, lead author of the study. "And even more surprising, the proportion of miscarriages went up as well."
The study, to be presented at the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology conference in Barcelona, showed paternal age led to decreases in the pregnancy rate, from 12.3 per cent with fathers 30 years of age or younger, to 9.3 per cent in fathers older than 45 years of age. The rate of miscarriage more than doubled over the same periods, from 13.7 per cent to 32.4 per cent.
In most cases the couples were being treated at the clinic because the husband had infertility issues, but researchers say the findings relate to men without such problems. "There is no doubt that we can extrapolate from the study to men in general," said co-author Yves Menezo, also a researcher at the Eylau Centre.
Belloc said sperm with DNA damage, common in older men, was still able to enter the egg during IUI, but the weakened sperm could result in failure to conceive.
While previous reports show a decline in sperm count and quality in older men, this is the first clinical proof of a direct affect on fertility.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Selina Renfrow
For The Calgary Herald
Monday, July 07, 2008
I knew better. I knew better than to have sex without protection. I could have taken that condom out of my pocket and used it.
But I didn't.
At the age of 20 I was pregnant, single and living at home. It took me two months to decide what I was going to do; two months to choose a path for my life.
I chose to be a mother.
Abortion was an option I never considered.
Yes, my Catholic upbringing had an influence on my beliefs. Yes, my parents had an influence, too. But what I believe is that a child is born at the moment of conception. Abortion, to me, is murder. I also believe in being responsible for my actions. I chose to have sex without using any form of birth control. I knew I was risking becoming pregnant or getting a sexually transmitted infection. I'll admit I was naive: I didn't think it would happen to me, but it did -- I was pregnant and I had to deal with it.
I considered adoption. I went to an adoption agency and I spoke with the social worker there. She told me giving up your child for adoption felt like your best friend in the whole world died. It was a huge, emotional roller-coaster that took time to heal from.
I considered motherhood. I've always wanted to be mom. I wanted to give birth to, and adopt, numerous children. These were the dreams of young girl who had no idea what it's like to be a parent.
I chose motherhood because I believe abortion is wrong and adoption too hard. I chose motherhood because I wanted to be a mom and knew I could be a mom, that it was my time. What if I gave up on my chance to be a mother now and I couldn't be a mom later? I didn't want to take that risk. I made my choice.
To hear that Dr. Henry Morgentaler is receiving the Order of Canada is upsetting. I don't particularly care about the order, but I do care that he's being recognized and honoured for his part in having Canada's abortion law overturned by the Supreme Court. To some, he's a hero for championing women's health care. But this confuses me. He made abortion more accessible for women, yes, but how does a quick solution to a much larger problem amount to being an advocate for women's health care?
One good thing about Dr. Morgentaler is that, every time he is in the headlines, the debate about abortion resumes in our newspapers. It has been 20 years since the historic Supreme Court decision. Since then, meaningful debate seems to have been squashed.
Those against abortion have had their voices silenced by many who believe the debate is not relevant. They label anti-abortionist and religious groups as anti-choice, which is not the same thing.
For those who believe in God, we believe that God gave us the freedom of choice. However, just because we have the ability to choose our own path does not mean it is OK to choose the wrong path.
Those who label themselves pro-choice say it's about a woman's right to choose what happens to her body. But a woman already made that choice when she decided to have sex. She can reduce the risk of an unwanted pregnancy by choosing a form of birth control. But no condom, patch or pill is 100 per cent effective.
Having sex can result in creating a child or contracting an STI or both. There are not many people in Canada who can claim ignorance to these facts. Schools, churches, doctors and, most importantly, parents have the responsibility to educate children on sexual health and reproduction.
What Dr. Morgentaler, abortionists and the Canadian government have said by allowing abortion is that it is OK to not want to live with the consequences of your actions, it is OK to be irresponsible. They will allow you an apparently easy way out so you can potentially make the same mistake again.
Education is the only way to prevent women and men from becoming parents unexpectedly.
We need to have a healthy respect for sex. It shouldn't be feared or shunned, nor should it mean nothing.
Twenty years after the Supreme Court struck down Canada's abortion law, we should be ready to move forward together.
Not having a law regarding abortion is not the solution to the problem of not living up to the responsibilities we have.
We are the only western country that does not have an abortion law, and that is not something to be proud of.
As for me, looking into the gorgeous face of my two-year-old daughter is.
Selina Renfrow is an editorial assistant at the Calgary Herald, a Mount Royal College journalism student and the proud mother of a two-year-old daughter.
© The Calgary Herald 2008
****
Men's age affects fertility
Older potential dads face greater difficulty: study
Matthew Coutts
Canwest News Service
Monday, July 07, 2008
TORONTO - The age of the potential father -- not just the mother -- can seriously limit the chances of having a baby later in life, according to a study released today.
While it has long been documented would-be mothers in their mid-30s, or older, face reduced pregnancy rates and increased miscarriages, researchers say this is the strongest proof to date that similar problems are caused by the age of the would-be father in couples that face difficulty conceiving.
Researchers at France's Eylau Centre for Assisted Reproduction monitored 21,239 cases of intrauterine inseminations, an effective type of artificial insemination, in more than 12,000 couples between 2002 and 2006.
They found maternal age was closely associated with a decrease in the pregnancy rate -- 8.9 per cent in women over 35 years, compared with 14.5 per cent in younger women -- as well as a higher miscarriage rate.
"But we also demonstrated that the age of the father was important in the rate of pregnancy, with a negative effect for men over 40," said Stephanie Belloc, lead author of the study. "And even more surprising, the proportion of miscarriages went up as well."
The study, to be presented at the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology conference in Barcelona, showed paternal age led to decreases in the pregnancy rate, from 12.3 per cent with fathers 30 years of age or younger, to 9.3 per cent in fathers older than 45 years of age. The rate of miscarriage more than doubled over the same periods, from 13.7 per cent to 32.4 per cent.
In most cases the couples were being treated at the clinic because the husband had infertility issues, but researchers say the findings relate to men without such problems. "There is no doubt that we can extrapolate from the study to men in general," said co-author Yves Menezo, also a researcher at the Eylau Centre.
Belloc said sperm with DNA damage, common in older men, was still able to enter the egg during IUI, but the weakened sperm could result in failure to conceive.
While previous reports show a decline in sperm count and quality in older men, this is the first clinical proof of a direct affect on fertility.
© The Calgary Herald 2008