<p>This is key. As Hunt pointed out, there is simply no way to know if a person is abstaining from sex. </p>
<p>I’m 40. In addition to the predictable “we’re going to be grandparents” announcements from people who would have bet the house that their children were waiting until marriage, I’ve seen a few tragedies. </p>
<p>A young woman we know lost her sight because as sick as she felt, she was so afraid of disappoiting her parents that she did not tell them she was pregnant. Earlier intervention would have saved her sight. It’s not reversable.</p>
<p>So, yes, of course there are people who wait until marriage or a committment ceremony. We don’t need to worry about them but rather support them in ways that are comfortable to the child. In a country where half the prenancies are unplanned, parents need to do their part to make sure that their child’s decision to not wait is not one that leads to lifelong health problems or even death.</p>
<p>I’d be willing to bet that our friends at college thought my boyfriend (now husband) and I were abstaining. We weren’t. But in our Christian Fellowship group, it was just assumed that everyone was celibate, even those of us in long-term relationships. We didn’t tell other people because it was none of their business, and because we believed they were right - what we were doing was a sin. But we were in love and planned to get married… and we were human. The refusal to admit to ourselves that we knew what we were doing and were going to continue doing it, even though it was “wrong,” very nearly lead to me being pregnant, because we didn’t even discuss contraception. To think ahead and purchase contraception would be admitting to ourselves that sex wasn’t just something that “happened,” it wasn’t an accident, we were planning to do it. And somehow we thought that would make our “sin” even worse. It wasn’t until I had a pregnancy scare that we finally wised up and bought condoms.</p>
<p>An attitude that “I would never do that,” or “My son or daughter wouldn’t do that” is exactly what put H and I into the situation we were in. I don’t recommend it.</p>
<p>I think the rule used to be you get a pap smear when you’re sexually active or 21 years old, whichever comes first. You do not need a pap smear to get birth control, but you do have to get a physical. If you are sexually active, I think they say a pap smear every other year/two years.</p>
<p>That being said, I have a friend who has been getting a pap smear every year since she turned 18 even though she has never been sexually active. I have no idea why!</p>
<p>I asked my daughter what she thought about this. She is nineteen and deferring college for a couple of years to train in her sport. She has been raised as a Catholic and cares deeply about her faith. Her reaction was that she would be hurt and insulted were I to have this conversation with her. It would be as if I didn’t trust her or believe her to be mature enough to know her own mind. However, she did say that as an apologist for her faith, it behooved her to understand what birth control is and does, as part of being able to explain why the church does not accept it.</p>
<p>At my doctor the rule is first pap smear comes three years after you become sexually active (which we ignored in my family-- we didnt wait the three years to start getting them), and we MUST come back every year to get another one (plus full gynecological exam) or they will not refill birth control pills.</p>
<p>I asked my mom if I could start BC at the end of high school, thinking that it would be nice to be protected just in case. Now I would never go off them sexually active or not just because it makes my periods so much better, to me the fact that they help prevent pregnancy is just a convenient side benefit. For me sex has little to nothing to do with it, I can’t imagine not considering BC pills just because of a commitment not to have sex, there are so many other benefits and they needn’t have anything to do with sex unless you choose to use them for that purpose. Though if you have an issue with what they literally do scientifically, then I suppose then that would be a reasonable problem to have with them.</p>
<p>And after that all remaining female children in the family were put on the pill regardless of if they were sexually active, my mom and aunt decided it was just time for everyone. I went on at 17, my cousin at 16, and my younger sister at 15. At the time, only the cousin was sexually active. In my family we just don’t view deciding to take BC as a decision to have sex or opening the door for sex, those are two entirely separate decisions in our eyes. There is a LOT more to having responsible sex than using contraception.</p>
<p>Emahee, I’m with you. I told my sister that all h*ll is going to break loose the day I decide to have kids and go off birth control! It just makes life so much easier - the “pregnancy prevention” thing was never a factor.</p>
<p>@Emaheevul07 that was the old rule, before November 2009. It is now what I posted and repeat pap every 2 years until 35 and then every 3 years if you’re low risk (one or no partners) and hopefully your doctor has updated his/her practice.</p>
<p>They have not, I have been informed I am to report in October if I intend to keep on with my bc regimen. Perhaps I should make a phone call. </p>
<p>Is it just the pap that’s every two years? When I go in for that they also do a pelvic and breast exam, under the new rules would I still do that every year but just a pap every other year, or is the whole thing every other year? I have not heard anything about this.</p>
<p>They should see you on a yearly basis. It is standard of care to continue doing the pelvic and the breast exam yearly but only do the pap every 2 years if your younger than 25. Typically, we don’t start pelvic exams until the age of 21 when paps are due. It would not be a good idea to prescribe BCPs without seeing you yearly. So, the fact that you are reporting in October is appropriate.</p>
<p>Ironically, her reactions show how immature she still is. I don’t mean that in an insulting way, I mean that she is acting her age.</p>
<p>There is nothing insulting about speaking to an adult child about how your relationship is changing. It’s important for them to know that they are their own people and that they should not be making decisions out of a desire to please you or at least not disappoint you. </p>
<p>It’s also very important to share the reality that Lafalum stated so well, </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As I shared before, it’s infuriating to me that no one ever spoke to us about this when I was going to my Catholic high school because it’s exactly what happened to so many of us. We should not have be left to deal with unplanned pregnancies and STDs on our own. It’s not a matter of trust, it’s a matter of trying to deal better with women who do have pre-marital sex than we have in the past.</p>
<p>I once heard a lecture for Catholics about unplanned teen pregnancies and he said that if we really want to make it a culture of life, then we have to accept teen pregnancy. Encourage young people to wait until marriage but remove the stigma of unplanned prengnacy. It’s the shame at having failed to abstain that drives many young women to abortion. It’s just too tempting to “wipe the slate clean” and deal wth the pain in private than face a community. When we make getting to the alter as a virgin the only way to “win”, then we are not choosing a culture of life. I’m not a Catholic anymore but that stuck with me.</p>
<p>No. But there is a way to approach issues like this. Consider a situation that’s somewhat analogous – a parent telling their child to call them if they drink, but also stating that they don’t approve of drinking. If they thought that this situation were impossible, they wouldn’t even bring it up. It’s the same principle here. So I’m not saying that the mother necessarily thinks that it is inevitable, but that the mother is basically saying that she is not even convinced that the daughter will be able to abstain from sex; again, if this situation were actually not possible, the discussion wouldn’t happen in the first place.</p>
<p>To take a mundane example, let’s return to the murder situation. Do you warn your child what to do if they murder someone in a spontaneous fit of rage? I have never heard of this happening. This is because the situation is considered so unlikely as not to be worth bringing up at all. That’s what I’m saying. The discussion is inherently demeaning to some degree. The mother cannot preface the statement with, “Now, I don’t actually think this would ever come up” because the discussion intrinsically assumes that it can. On the other hand, the mother could begin with, “I’m supportive of your beliefs, but if they ever change, please let me know and we can discuss this.” This is fundamentally different because the mother is no longer assuming a disconnect between belief and action.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, except about contraception. The pregnancy issue is more one of unconditional support and doesn’t even necessarily involve consensual sex. But I hope that you can see the difference between, “take contraception just in case you do act in conflict with your beliefs” and “we will be here for you if you make mistakes.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hunt, I’m sorry, but that statement is ridiculous. What I’m saying is that my framework is incredibly specific and not one encountered by most people. I understand the arrogance of that statement, but you are going to have to give me the benefit of the doubt here. When I say that I know my friends are abstinent, what I am saying is that the probability that they have had sex is the same as that they have committed murder, or a massive genocide that was covered up. That is the kind of people I deal with on a daily basis, whose lives are based solely around one concept – religion. I understand that everyone makes mistakes. I make them all the time and have no problem admitting it, and really am quick to forgive those who make honest mistakes (it takes a bit longer for the malicious ones, I confess), and so I am not saying this as someone who is not told anything for fear of retribution or shunning. You just have to understand that there are people out there whose worldview is unbelievably different from the standard.</p>
<p>So, I do not know they are abstinent. In the same way that you do not know that your family is plotting to kill you or that your child is actually a serial killer. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hunt, I totally agree. What I am saying here is that the mother should not approach this issue with a flippant attitude of, “Oh, if it happens, which obviously I think it will, be prepared.” That’s the wrong mindset, and to me is incredibly offensive and condescending. </p>
<p>@Lafalum, thank you for sharing your story – it is definitely one from a perspective not often heard relating to this.</p>
<p>Baelor, I do not mean this in a disrespectful way at all but you sound very young. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I personally know no one who has killed anyone in a fit of rage (or at least no one who was caught.) Patricide and seriel killers are both rare events. I’ve lost count of the number of people I know who declared themselves abstinant who’ve aquired STDs and/or become pregnant. </p>
<p>That’s why I don’t talk about murdering in a fit of rage with my kid but we do discuss safe sex (he’s gay, so the pregnancy thing is not a concern.) Life experience does count for something and it provides a context that is simply not available to someone younger.</p>
<p>Reality is not demeaning. It’s not the same to speak to your child about the possibility of pre-marital sex as it is to assume they might wind up committing murder. One is the basis of human life, among the most basic and natural of human actions. The other is an artificial interruption of the natural order. </p>
<p>There is not one group of human beings, religious or otherwise, who are beyond the reach of temptation or so strong that not one member would never falter.</p>
<p>The fact is that you have no way of knowing who is a virgin and who is not. That’s not ridiculous, it’s simply a fact. I don’t know why that bothers people so much. We have parents here who claim to know their adult child’s sexual status and now we have you who seems to believe that the odds are the same that one of your friends is not a virgin and my son is plotting to kill me. </p>
<p>You cannot know someone elses sexual status. It’s not possible.</p>
<p>Actually, my daughter is mature beyond her years, but that is neither here nor there. I think what this thread has shown me is that it’s very important to be having age appropriate conversations about these issues early on, so that the pre-college/birth control talk (if that is what it is) grows organically out of conversations that have occurred before.</p>
<p>We started the contraceptive discussion 2 years ago when my son was finishing his sophmore year of HS. I have always discussed our family policy on alcohol, drugs and sexual activity with him at what I hoped were the right times and in age appropriate ways. His dad and I felt pretty strongly he wasn’t ready for the emotional or physical repercussions of sex and he knew that, but I am also not naive and I think almost everyone is born with a sex drive, with a nod to Baelor I don’t think everyone is born with a murderous rage, or the fact that sex is socially acceptable while murder is not does seem to keep the murder rate down and the birth rate going strong comparatively. Anyway we stressed contraceptive use as our son’s responsibility, not his GF’s. He is responsible for not becoming a father, not getting a STD. We spelled out the consequences of an unplanned pregnancy. We would see him through college while helping to support his child, he would not be able to be on the crew team, because he would need to have a part time job, his college choice would be influenced by proximity to his child. We would expect him to pay us back for the basic child support (of course there would be grandparent stuff above and beyong, i’m not a heartless monster). I just thought he should make any decisions with eyes wide open, most of the discussion evolved over time, a lot of it when he had his first serious GF. I don’t know if it is right for any other family, but it felt right to have and to continue to have these kinds of discussions.</p>
<p>Right – it IS the same principle. I can disapprove of underage drinking all I like, but I’d be a fool to pretend that I can just tell my children that and bingo, no alcohol will ever cross their precious lips when they are in college. Likewise, I can disapprove of premarital sex all I like (I don’t, but theoretically), but I’d be a fool to pretend that I can just tell my children that and bingo, they won’t ever do it. I think ignorance and putting one’s head in the sand is not a good way to go through life. </p>
<p>Anyway, for some of us the big concern about premarital sex IS the possibility of getting pregnant and / or contracting disease – not the act itself.</p>
<p>Baelor, having read several of your previous posts, I would say that I can understand your assertion. You and I share a great deal in terms of faith and tradition. Let me tell you a few anecdotes from the four years I was in college:</p>
<p>-The two student campus ministers - leaders of the faith community at our university - were found together in bed. Both were daily communicants.</p>
<p>-One member of our campus ministry community married his girlfriend between semesters junior year because she was pregnant.</p>
<p>-A close friend from my home church, the leader of the music ministry, started a relationship with a guy she met at a religious retreat. The problem was, she was married at the time. While in the process of separating from her husband, her relationship with this guy developed into a sexual relationship. She was very open about this with me, and claimed that it wasn’t adultery, “because I’m not getting paid for it.” I didn’t point out the fact that what she was describing would be called “prostitution.” I think deep in her soul, she knew that…</p>
<p>I share these stories not for the shock value, but to point out that, in the short span of four years, several very well-meaning faithful people I knew failed to live up to their ideals. It can happen, even to people who are deeply religious. </p>
<p>And, to take this out of the realm of anecdotes and into the realm of data, consider this:</p>
<p>So, I can understand your position. Nobody on this board is doubting your resolve, nor that of the members of your community. But those of us with 20+ years of experience since our college days know that life is hard sometimes.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I couldn’t agree more! I am not actually opposed to premarital sex, I just feel emotional maturity should play a part. I feel the same way about drinking at any age, just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s smart to get totally wasted.</p>
<p>personally know no one who has killed anyone in a fit of rage</p>
<p>I was pta co chair with someone whose child also was " on the spectrum" which includes being impulsive- unfortunately that included a fit of rage that left a young man dead. But he didn’t get anyone pregnant.</p>
<p>I think it all goes back to how one discusses this subject with their child. I agree that information is necessary and that it needs to be presented factually and medically accurately. And supporting your child’s decision is critical. Keeping them safe is also critical. For lots of reasons, including the fact that all sex is not consensual. </p>
<p>But, I do see Baelor’s point- there does seem to be a very dismissive attitude toward people who choose to refrain from sexual activity before marriage. Whenever someone says that that is their position- folks counter it with stories about how others have failed to live up to that ideal. The person is told that they are young, naive, inexperienced, haven’t met the person with whom the horizontal mambo is inevitable, etc… It is a disrespectful attitude- because it tells the person, oh you don’t really know anything, but we do, and you better get on bc because we know you probably really can’t control yourself. </p>
<p>Humanity is full of people who make mistakes. It is also, thankfully, filled with people who actually succeed at living up to their values.</p>
<p>In a certain way, this is a similar to the concept of pre-nuptual agreements. While there are many reasons to have one, one must question the likely outcome of the marriage if, even before they tie the knot, they are planning for failure.</p>