12 year old and STD's
shadowcast
Posts: 2,231
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/califor ... ts-kn.html
So let me get this straight. A 15 year old girl knows she is going to be sexually active and decides to get a vaccine to prevent the risk of certain cancers, precancerous cervical cell changes and genital warts. She doesn't want to tell her parents because she is embarrassed to talk to them about this. What’s the problem? Why is everyone having a fit over this? Do you agree with this?
So let me get this straight. A 15 year old girl knows she is going to be sexually active and decides to get a vaccine to prevent the risk of certain cancers, precancerous cervical cell changes and genital warts. She doesn't want to tell her parents because she is embarrassed to talk to them about this. What’s the problem? Why is everyone having a fit over this? Do you agree with this?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Asssemblywoman Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) sponsored AB 499 with the aim of providing young people with timely preventative treatment, including the human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccine that proponents say can reduce the risk of certain cancers, precancerous cervical cell changes and genital warts.
The measure was backed by groups including the California STD Controllers Assn., the Health Officers Assn. of California, ACT for Women and Girls and the American Civil Liberties Union.
The bill was opposed by the California Catholic Conference, which opposed previous measures that allow minors to consent to certain treatments without the involvement of parents.
That group wrote to legislators that "this bill is dangerous because it expands a faulty law which assumes that children know better than their parents and because it will allow minors access to HPV vaccines which may cause them permanent harm."
I agree with the last paragraph.
I'm all for education and birth control options without consent for young adults.
Twelve is a child and I am not for the government saying to a child
without the parental involvement... 'get this vaccine.'
Educate the parents who then educate the children.
So 12 is too young? What age do you think is appropriate? 18? Maybe 16?
By the way, I'm not saying I disagree with you. I'm really conflicted on this. I can definitely see both sides here.
GOD HIMSELF HAS DECREED, oh wait, no he didn't, nevermind.
Again if you can consent to the testing, and the treatment for GC, chl, or HPV, why could you not consent for this preventative measure?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
really don't like that at any age ... but an adult of course at 18 makes their own choices.
I am for very little government intervention...
and I never get a flu shot
The parents who want no part of this vaccine may have a reason for this.
We can not assume they are wrong and the government is right in all cases.
Adelaide 1998
Adelaide 2003
Adelaide 2006 night 1
Adelaide 2006 night 2
Adelaide 2009
Melbourne 2009
Christchurch NZ 2009
Eddie Vedder, Adelaide 2011
PJ20 USA 2011 night 1
PJ20 USA 2011 night 2
Adelaide BIG DAY OUT 2014
Minors are already allowed to consent to healthcare services for sexually transmitted infections in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Furthermore, since its inception in 1970, Title X of the federal Public Health Services Act has mandated confidential family planning services to all people, regardless of age. Federal Medicaid statute also requires that family planning services are provided confidentially to minors.
Evidence has shown time and time again that parental involvement requirements for minors' reproductive healthcare only puts teens at risk. They are far less likely to get services for prevention or treatment of STIs or pregnancy, but are not any less likely to engage in risky sexual behavior. It's really a question of whether our dogma is more important than the health and safety of our kids.
The medical profession is in agreement on this as well. The American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Physicians, American Medical Association, and Society for Adolescent Medicine are just a few of the professional organizations which have made official statements in support of confidential reproductive health services for minors.
It's really a no-brainer.
I am a parent. I can tell you that if, and I will do my best to avoid this, but if my daughter is ever embarrassed about getting the medical care she needs I hope she is able to find a place that makes her feel comfortable and gets her the care she needs.
Pandora, I would like to extend to you an invitation to come to my clinic and see the people we help every day with this very problem...they are scared and would not get help if their parents had to know...about once a month we see a 15 year old with P.I.D because she was too scared to get the medical care she needed...No matter what we feel about a 12 year old being sexually active, if they are active, they need the proper care.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
My opinion, that is over the top intrusion to the family unit by the government.
Educate the parents ... include the parents... the vaccine is a preventive,
no child has to be embarrassed because it does not imply sexual activity.
And there are some who do not agree with vaccines at all, in fact a growing number
questioning them and the requirements.
Wouldn't THIS be the over-the-top intrusion you feel that giving a 12-year-old the freedom to make such a decision without parental involvement is?
No it is not the government who should decide if someone gets a vaccine or not ...
perhaps laws such as this is the first step at that.
As I said many are questioning vaccines in general and their right to choose
also questioning this pill pushing nation we have become run by the pharmaceutical companies...
big huge business that it is
For me, yes I would rather see money go into education for parents...
not sure where your want or lack of it comes in,
parents want what is best for their children,
it is up to society and government to educate ... not makes choices for its citizens.
So again, if a parent chooses not to be educated, how does this help an underage girl make an informed decision?
ahh I misunderstood, sorry about that
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Stick to one age. This is ridiculous. One could say they are taking advantage of a minor.
Really? A no brainer to allow 12 year olds to make decisions like this without parental consent? That is ridiculous.
The "no brainer" is for the government to get the hell out of the argument.
And by the way, I have a daughter and I would support her getting the vaccine. Of course, I would read up a bit more prior to having her get it, but I'm pretty sure I'd do it. It's not about whether the vaccine is a good thing or not, it's about who should be able to decide that.
Like Pandora i'm one of those people who doesn't get flu shots, so I can see how vaccines without parental permission could have serious issues... Especially since at that age the child really doesn't know what's best for them (I can't believe they're even having sex that young!)...
But on the other hand the consequences of getting a STD (especially, i assume, during those developmental years) are horrible and most probably a repercussion that a 12 year old wouldn't even think of or at least not seriously take into account.
Sex ed is so important! I guess the problem is not only the embarrassment on the child's part but also the parent's, I assume its awkward for parents to talk to and educate their children on sex. Which is immature, in my opinion, but still happens. Oh and that religion thing too.
It is a preventive vaccine for a disease.
Not unlike the other vaccines parents get for their children
when they choose to protect them against childhood diseases.
You are assuming with the proper education
a parent would not choose to vaccinate their child for future sexual activity
they will enjoy when they are adults or near to be because of morality issues.
There is no morality question about this...
it is for a disease they can contract when they are adults.
This vaccine, as many are, is for lifelong diseases, lifelong prevention.
Educate the parents.
The key here is it is a vaccine and not a choice a child should have.
Only an adult should be able to choose once they have made an educated decision
about the risks involved for their child or themselves.
Call me crazy, but I don't think vaccines for stds are the answer. Sex education is. Giving out vaccines, in my opinion, promotes ignorance. Like..."Why do I have to learn about stds if I can just rely on a shot?" I can just hear some kid saying such a thing. And that's promoting ignorance. Forget reliance on yet another form of vaccination and get our kids informed, for bob's sake! And pass out those condoms!
I still beg to differ that sexual activity as an adult is a moral issue.
That a vaccine that prevents cervical cancer in a young adult woman is a moral issue,
that is really off base. This vaccine has nothing to do with condoning sexual
activity ... it is a preventive for adult diseases.
Once educated a parent will understand it is not unlike
other vaccines or like the meningitis vaccine
recommended for my kids at age 14 back in the 90's.
For me still the moral issue is invading the family unit,
taking rights way from parents and giving them to uninformed children
who may not care to understand the risks involved because they do not even
grasp the concept yet.
A person's brain is not fully grown until they are well into their 20's
to even understand full consequence of their actions or lack there of.
They should not decide about vaccines at age twelve!
The no-brainer is to not create laws that increase children's risk. The government is actually not in the argument at all. This law is specifically saying the government is required to stay OUT of the argument. If the government forbid sexually active people from getting reproductive healthcare unless their parents' consented, THAT would be government interference.
Whether or not you (or anyone else) would allow your daughter to get reproductive healthcare doesn't matter. The point is that many minors will just not seek care rather than having to discuss it with their parents, whether or not their parents would agree.
We must also take into consideration that this vaccine is different from other vaccines in that once you miss your window of opportunity, which is gone by the time you're an adult, you no longer have the option to get vaccinated to prevent you from getting HPV and cervical cancer as an adult. So a parental consent law would not only allow parents to make decisions for their children, they would also be making decisions for the adults their children will become. The old adage that "You can make your own decisions when you turn 18" doesn't apply here. No, in fact they can't make their own decision about this when they turn 18.
because it is based in sexuality....yes? I did not say no one would view it this way but
Yes I am disagreeing with that. It is a preventive adult disease vaccine not birth control etc.
and with education this will be understood.
I think there will be a huge factor of people though who see the real moral issue
to be the government passing laws that interfere with the family unit
and give rights to uniformed twelve year olds when they are mere children.
And at the same time give the right to the government to vaccinate our children
without our permission. That is ridiculous prospect.
Every decision a parent makes is making a decision for the adults their children will become.
You know this is different. The consequences - which affect the adult, not the child - are irreversible. That is not the same as other decisions to prevent someone from receiving vaccinations.