Maine Middle School to Offer Birth Control

1of42 · November 8, 2007, 1:22pm

Bay: Did you read my posts, or just pick something out from one up the page and comment on it? I specifically addressed the parenting issue.

In today’s society, many parents aren’t particularly good, and their jobs are being done by schools and the state. In these situations, since schools can’t stop the children form having sex, it’s best to just make it as safe as possible.

Before you object with “but if the parents won’t stop it, they should have their children taken away”, think about the can of worms that is opening up. Think about the bad outcomes for many children with less-than-ideal parents who are placed in the foster care system, think about the issues with how far we can regulate parenting and so forth.

Bay · November 8, 2007, 1:38pm

You are very astute 1of42. While I intermittently check this thread, I did, in fact just read this page today before making my comment. I don’t think we should take the kids away from their parents and I did not propose it. But we need to intervene with the parents, and force them to take responsibility for their kids. (Remember that case where the mom who didn’t enforce her son’s attendance at school was ankle-chained to her son and had to go with him?)

1of42 · November 8, 2007, 1:47pm

Haha, that ankle chaining thing sounds hilarious, and like a totally appropriate punishment. ;)

However, I really think some of the parenting stuff becomes a major Pandora’s box of trouble. The attendance thing is one thing. Getting parents to enforce chastity, for example, could be quite another. And then, of course, you have to contend with who gets to decide mores to enforce upon parents. For example, I would argue that many Evangelical Christian parents (think Jesus Camp) are abusing their children. I doubt you’d find many who agree with me, but that’s just the problem - who decides the rules?

Bay · November 8, 2007, 2:17pm

Its not so hard to decide which rules to enforce when those rules are the law. (truancy, statutory rape, gross sexual assault). I acknowledge it seems like a problem with no solution but I would not be averse to a judge sentencing a parent to temporarily chaining themselves to their child, delivering their child to supervised child care or videotaping their child 24/7 to ensure the child was not having sex if that is what it would take to protect the child. I know it sounds draconian but its a child’s life we are talking about. If it inconvenienced/punished the parent enough, then hopefully it would force the parent into taking a more active role.

1of42 · November 8, 2007, 2:30pm

Yep, when it’s an issue of the law I agree. But I’m under the impression (and I could very much be wrong) that in most states sex between preteen children of the same age is not explicitly illegal (in Maine we know it is, from earlier in the discussion). And I would argue that it should not be (government staying out of private life and all that).

Still though, I think we’re in general agreement about what the root issue is that needs to be solved. I just happen to think that until it is solved fully, providing birth control is simply an issue of safety.

Bay · November 8, 2007, 2:50pm

I’m fairly confident that any sex with a child under 14 is a crime in most states. If a child that age is having consensual sex, then it really is a matter of parental neglect/child endangerment. The parents need to be part of the solution, and if they refuse to make the effort, then I think that shows they are unfit to be parents. At that point, it probably is best to remove the child from that situation.

We are looking at relatively few cases (17 middle schoolers in the last 4 years), so about 4 per year. A judge could come up with a customized plan that would fit the lives of each family and ensure that the child was supervised 24/7. It really does not seem that insurmountable when you think about it.

07DAD · November 8, 2007, 5:38pm

Bay said:

Here is what I found out about my homestate, Texas.

Penal Code 21.11 makes sex/and almost any other sexual contact with a child younger than 17 “and not the person’s spouse” a crime. It is either a 2nd or 3rd degree felony.

BUT there is an affirmative defense if the actor was not more than 3 years older that the victim, and of the opposite sex, so long as duress, force or threat against the victim “at the time of the offense” was not used.

Effectively, its a 3 year safe-harbor rule. So, in the Moral Utopia, a heterosexual actor has a defense no matter how young the victim so long as the actor is not over 3 years older than the victim and no duress, force or threat is used.

However, under Penal code 21.02, if the actor is 17 or older and the victim is under 14 there is another offense called “continuous sexual abuse of young child”. It is where there are 2 or more acts of sexual abuse during a period that is 30 or more days in duration. It is a first degree felony.

There is an affirmative defense if the actor is not more than 5 years older than the victim and no duress, force or threat is used against the victim at the time of the commision of any of the acts constituting an offense.

Effectively, a 17 year old actor can avoid a 1st degree felony charge for sustained sexual conduct with 12 and 13 year olds if no duress, force or threat at the time of the act is used.

The defenses don’t apply for life registered sex offenders.

atomom the stats are in the *Dallas Morning News *front page article dated 11-5-07. It lists the sourses as the Office of Gov. Rick Perry, Texas Department of State Health Services, Texas Education Agency, California Dept of Health Services, Bixby Center for Reproductive Health & Policy, Un. of Cal., at SF and Dallas Morning News Research.

atomom thanks for the kind words about the dead girl. Unfortunately, her story gets worse. Her religion would not allow her to receive a religious service because she had committed suicide. I saw in the 1980’s that this moral absolutist position on the availability of the service changed. The word got out the her mother took the position that her daughter had double-sinned, fornication and suicide, and the father/husband subsequently divorced the mother.

There is a somewhat up-beat ending. The family member I knew who was my age came back to a HS reunion years later and said that his mom had blamed the dead daughter (his sister) for the divorce. He said that he had decided after his sister’s death and his parents’ divorce that he would never give any child of his the “no way out” treatment he and his siblings had been given by their mom.

I asked him about his father. He said that years later he and his dad had talked and that the dad admitted that he had let the mom set the rules and tone of the family from her view of what has “right” and that his dad sincerely regretted that he and his siblings had known such intolerance.

That is partly why I question the idea that we can refuse BC to girls who request it. You just cannot assume that the parents can or will do what needs to be done when dealing with issues of sexuality since most of us are a product of our up-bringing and you never know when some one has a nut job for a parent.

Bay · November 8, 2007, 7:12pm

07dad,
I think you missed sec. 21.011 - Sexual assault of a child. There is no affirmative defense if the child is under 14.

Bay · November 8, 2007, 7:38pm

Here’s something else that might interest you, 07DAD:

[DFPS</a> - Legal Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect](<a href=“http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:y-lLmEmxcoEJ:www.dfps.state.tx.us/child_protection/about_child_protective_services/legaldefinitions.asp]DFPS”>http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:y-lLmEmxcoEJ:www.dfps.state.tx.us/child_protection/about_child_protective_services/legaldefinitions.asp)

In Texas, a child having sex = child abuse

Sarahsmom42 · November 8, 2007, 10:34pm

I have a son who is 15. He plays a sport year round and if he’s not with a coach or a teacher, he’s under the supervision of a parent; his own or a friend’s. When we have schools that let out at 1:50 and kids are left to “hang out” for hours unsupervised, what do we expect? Kids in private schools around here often go to school from 7:30 or 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 or 6:00. They are given extra help and tutoring on sight and are required to take two foreign languages, play on a sports team and/or participate in another school related activities. The public school system in this country is run on a time schedule that was developed a hundred or more years ago when kids were needed to work on farms. When are we going to update this silly system and provide these kids with needed supervision and counsel.

Bay · November 9, 2007, 12:03am

I agree completely, Sarahsmom. There is absolutely no reason why 11-13 year olds should ever be left unsupervised such that they are able to engage in sexual activity.

07DAD · November 9, 2007, 9:58am

One problem that keeps being identified in Texas is the high incidence of sexual contact by adults who “supervise” kids as teachers, clergy, coaches and in scouting. There are now even special penal provisions relating to some of these “caregivers.” I was a parental chaperon on trips with my S’s school math club (all male–atomom). The teacher-sponsor gave the chaperons specific instructions how not to ever be alone in the hotel room with just one boy!!

We have had several incidents in Texas (including the WACO Koresh event) where the authorities (and CPS) have raided “religious” cult groups on the basis of institutionalized child sexual abuse.

Sarahsmom42: My S went to a private boy’s school. His GF went to a private girl’s school. My best friend went to the local Catholic co-ed prep school in the late 1980’s and is an active alum. Through my S, my wife and I met girls who went to the Catholic all girl school. I admit that these kids have more events and spend more time in after-school sports, arts and academic group activities than many public school kids.

However, kids at all these private schools are sexually active. [I am not saying that all kids at these schools are sexually active] I asked my buddy who went to the Catholic school and he said that those who partnered up used birth control. My S and his GF’s private schools teach birth control.

And, not all private schools think standing guard against students’ sexual conduct is their role as educators. One head of middle school told me that the goal was to provide a safe environment for age appropriate experimentation. Knock on wood, in the 9 years S attended private school I never heard a report of some boy getting some girl pregnant. I seem to recall only one pregnancy at the girl’s school.

Bay: I think it is a mistake to think that there is some magic “safe” arrangement or “sex-free” zones depending on the kid’s school and/or activities. Fool-proof supervision to stop kid with kid sex? Not likely. Candidly, the private school event supervison, albeit better than the latch-key arrangement, is not going to stop this, and may only slow it down. Which is better than nothing, but does not provide a reason to think sex education including BC is unnecessay. It doesn’t take very much time or space for kids to have sex.

Hanna · November 9, 2007, 10:32am

“the high incidence of sexual contact by adults who “supervise” kids as teachers, clergy, coaches and in scouting.”

Yep. In middle school, I was involved with a very serious, high-commitment extracurricular program. I had a phenomenal experience there. When I went to a reunion recently, I found out from older friends from the program (they were in high school when I was in middle school) that one of my favorite program leaders had had an ongoing, consensual affair with one of the other high schoolers during my time there. Apparently all the high schoolers knew about it at the time, but their gossip sailed over my sixth-grade head. I was stunned speechless, because I’d known this man since I was 7 years old, I thought he was a fantastic leader/teacher, and I never had one uncomfortable or sketchy vibe from him, ever. My parents loved him. I saw him last year, and he’s just as un-creepy now as he was then.

I still almost can’t believe it. You never think it’s happening right under your nose.

sjmom2329 · November 9, 2007, 11:12am

How consensual is a sexual relationship between a high school girl and a male teacher/leader? Isn’t the whole issue of sexual harrassment one of power differences?

Hanna · November 9, 2007, 11:24am

This particular relationship was subjectively consensual, and I think that’s relevant to the story – as well as to the law, since the student was above the age of consent in that state. I think we can all agree that it would have been even worse for a leader to repeatedly rape a student by force, as opposed to seducing her. However, if I didn’t think the whole business was scandalous, I wouldn’t have been shocked by it (or mentioned it here).

sjmom2329 · November 9, 2007, 11:30am

I understand that you were shocked, as you should be. I just have an issue of the label “consensual” when the power relationship is so uneven. There are ethical issues even when TAs or professors date undergraduates, a situation that most of us could understand somewhat.

Hanna · November 9, 2007, 12:05pm

Subjectively consensual might be a better way to describe those relationships. As far as I can determine, all based on hearsay since I was oblivious at the time, the student was in her late teens and felt she was having a passionate romantic adventure. I don’t know who it was, so I have no idea whether she now feels taken advantage of or abused. This all happened, if it happened, decades ago.

My main point was, it is really hard to tell who’s trustworthy around your teenagers. My parents had been around the block a few times raising four daughters in the city. They knew this man and everyone else at the organization personally and well. It just goes to show that even a carefully chosen and heavily supervised ballet school/cheerleading gym/riding stable/Outward Bound camp staffed by personal friends can still hold unwelcome surprises for parents.

07DAD · November 10, 2007, 2:34pm

Hanna and sjmom2329:

At least in my homestate, Texas, the legislature has decided that there should not be a gray area in sex between students and employees of primary and secondary schools. It is a felony, no affirmative defenses. But, as I reported Texas has one of the highest incedence of teacher/student sex.

My concern is that Texas, as an example, has criminal laws on the books that should go a long way to stop any sexual activity other than kid on kid, yet according to the stats in the articles I’ve been referring to only about 1/3 of the sexual conduct is kid on kid. So, it appears that the illegality of the conduct hasn’t stopped sex with kids by non-kids.

As Bay correctly pointed out, in Texas Child Protective Services can institutionalize a child (take the child away from the parent(s)) where the child has been the subject of sexual conduct (apparently including kid with kid sex). But, obviously that “club” has not stopped underage sex in Texas.

And, the apparent consensus is that relying on the schools, religious organizations, sports and extra cirricular activities to keep the kids from having sex is no guaranty that they won’t engage in kid with kid sex or kid with adult sex while under that “supervision.”

So, it seems to me that Texas’ position to do what it can to turn kids away from BC when they are, or are going to be, sexually active is a direct factor in Texas’ abysmal lack of success in getting its teen birth rate and pregnancy rate down in line with BC “permissive” states like California.

I think that the town in Maine is doing what appears to be effective in helping prevent unwanted pregnancies from the California results, yes even for girls that really are way too young to give any form of consent to having sex.

I believe that if the medical (and the school) employees are required to turn a girl into the police and/or CPS if she asks for BC, girls will cease to ask, not cease to be sexually active. Even if not allowed to report the request for BC, that doesn’t mean that the adult employees cannot or will not counsel the girl to get her parents involved, as the head of the Baltimore program said seemed to work and be effective to open the communication with and get the support of the girl from her parents.

The parents who have principles that keep them from advocating BC to their children are free to continue with that approach with their child and they can do what they can to never allow their child an opportunity to “slip.”

1of42 · November 10, 2007, 4:21pm

Bay: Are you sure? I read the definitions of abuse, and the only things I saw that seem to toe with child sex = child abuse are:

“G. compelling or encouraging a child to engage in sexual conduct as defined by Section 43.01, Penal Code;”

or

“K. causing, permitting, encouraging, engaging in, or allowing a sexual performance by a child as defined by Section 43.25, Penal Code.”

The first is obviously a proscription against adults making their children have sex, but the 2nd is not about any sex, it’s about sex specifically as part of a “performance”. Section 43.25 of the penal code can be found at <a href=“http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.009.00.000043.00.htm[/url]”>http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.009.00.000043.00.htm</a>.

07DAD · November 11, 2007, 6:04pm

1of42. I think Bay is referring to:

To me, the “teeth” available to CPS indicates that parents aren’t successful in policing their children, otherwise why would this be a basis for removal of the child?

I would be interested in yours comments. As I’ve reported from local newspaper sources, BC is available under federal law to girls of low income and through Medicaid. Since federal law pre-empts conflicting state law in every state of the USA, at least some girls nationwide are going to have access to BC even if using it in sexual activity is illegal for one or perhaps both sexual participants under the law of a particular state.

Does the fact that the BC is legally available to only some make it seem illogical to keep it from others based on higher income and/or what state their parents have them reside in? Don’t rich pre-teen and teen girls deserve the reproductive choice of BC as much as those less economically advantaged?

Maine Middle School to Offer Birth Control

CONNECT WITH US