<p>Thinking back on my own sheltered childhood, I am pretty sure my mom told me the facts of life about age 12, but I thought boys were completely and utterly disgusting until about age 15 (the boys). I wouldn’t have been caught naked (or even somewhat unclothed) with a boy for all the bubblegum at the 5&10. Don’t these kids have afterschool programs? midnight basketball? clubs? homework? dishes? church choir? brownies? </p>
<p>The parents of the pregnant middle schooler should go to jail (and obviously, the boy too, if he is over 16).</p>
<p>There was a scandal here last winter when a 13 yo girl performed an oral sex act on her classmate, 14, WHILE ON THE SCHOOL BUS coming back from a field trip. The teachers were on the bus and apparently the act was witnessed by some students. Both the boy and girl were suspended, but the teachers & driver weren’t charged. However, the teachers and an aide were sued by the parents (I think of the boy, but not sure). </p>
<p>Can you even imagine that? I still just shake my head incredulously.</p>
<p>Sunny: my cousin used to teach at a middle school in the inner city and she had a 5th grader, age 10, who delivered a baby in her classroom!!! A somewhat heavy girl, no one noticed or could tell she was pregnant. She told my cuz her legs hurt and my cuz thought it seemed like a lot more than her legs were hurting. The girl sat down, screamed, my cuz looked up her skirt - and the baby was crowning. Made the papers in 1971.</p>
<p>This is cultural, as well. My sister is an anthro major and interviewed many people in Kenya for her senior thesis. She was extremely surprised when people told her over and over again that they first had sexual intercourse at 9, 10, or 11, often during “play” activity. In the US that would get the kids sent to therapy and would raise serious questions about what’s going on in the home–as it should in the US. In other counties, it may be different.</p>
<p>1of42, in addition to asymmetry of power issues, there is also the problem of whether someone is capable of giving consent. The issue has parallels with laws regarding sex while intoxicated. Legally, a drunk person cannot give consent, so if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it can be seen as a rape. The obvious question is then what happens with two drunk people who have sex with each other? Are they raping each other? Well, I guess technically they may be, depending on the particulars of the law. If a twelve year old is seen as incapable of giving sexual consent, like a drunk person is, then there would be problems with two 12 year olds having sex. It depends very much on the particular laws in the state though.</p>
<p>That may be true, corranged. However, if we assume that 13 year-olds cannot give consent, when two 13 year-olds have consensual sex with one another, what do we do? Accuse them of raping each other?</p>
<p>Bay, I agree, I don’t really think young teens should ever be having sex with each other, but I also think it’s one of those issues that should absolutely not be dealt with by the law. It should be dealt with by the parents, by counselors, by other authority figures, and so forth. Dealing with the issue using the law raises all kinds of logical absurdities, and is over-application of the law, in my view.</p>
<p>Perhaps you could accuse them of raping each other, but it’s definitely not the best course of action. I’m with you on the fact that this shouldn’t be dealt with in a court of law in the vast majority of cases. I just wanted to point out that there may be thoughts going into consent laws other than issues relating to an imbalance of power.</p>
<p>Well, the implication of the imbalance of power is that it makes the person who is on the weak side of the relationship unable to give consent, so really it’s the same thing. But yeah, dealing with this stuff in court is absurd, imo.</p>
<p>With the amount of sexual harassment that I remember going on in middle school, that was completely ignored by teachers, I fail to be shocked that so many middle schoolers have problematic perspectives on sexuality. If you get shoved against the wall and groped at least once a week, as I remember happening to some of the girls, it doesn’t do much for your self-respect.</p>
<p>My original post concerned the availablity of birth control for 11-13 y.o. in Maine public schools.</p>
<p>It seems we all agree and understand that children under 12 are having sex, hence the need for the “strict liability” sexual assault statutes even where there is no compulsion involved in the sex act. The Maine Code does seem to be one of general application and gender neutral so it would apply to both kids if under 14. Note that the US Supreme Court has ruled that laws can pass constitutional muster if they penalize the male and not the female in the statutory rape context.</p>
<p>SO, other than lament that it should not be so (at least in the USA), what do you think about using public funds to provide these kiddos with protection when they have sex?</p>
<p>Some posts have indicated “better” (only in relative terms) to have these children have protection than face pregnancy and the choice of abortion. Clearly some of us are old enough to remember life before *Griswold v. Connecticut<a href=“contraceptives”>/I</a> and Roe v. Wade. What do you think? Is it better now?</p>
<p>jessiehl mentions self-respect and sexual harrassment from a girl’s perspective. I got to observe over the middle school and high school years of my S how many girls are the aggressors. Does the availability of birth control have an effect on that? </p>
<p>Or are we all getting up-tight over something that has been around forever? Some kids start early and some wait. Is it OK to get the early starters some protection?</p>
<p>The school district in Portland has had 5 middle school pregnancies in the past several years. If the relationship between pregnancy and sexual activity is similar to what it is for adults, one can only imagine how many hundred of the kids are sexually active. Of course, it’s best to offer birth control only after they are pregnant. </p>
<p>“With the amount of sexual harassment that I remember going on in middle school, that was completely ignored by teachers,”</p>
<p>You fail to account for the amount of sexual harrassment committed BY teachers (estimated at between 6-8% of all students).</p>
<p>Certainly this story today has resonated with many…CNN featured it… I got copies of this story sent to me in my work email…the CNN story says that Portland’s 3 middle schools had 17 pregnancies over last 4 yrs…not including ones that ended due to abortion or miscarriage. Is 17 too many? not enough for this action? who should call that ball?</p>
<p>My gut reaction is that no one wants to have to offer birth control to middle school kids…but, what does one do when no one else is able to stop the “babies giving birth to babies” situation? I applaud the folks involved with the health office for stepping up to the plate and adding another tool to their arsenal. </p>
<p>Whether forced or consensual, middle school kids do not fully understand the consequences of their behaviors…and if adults are abusing young girls, then I hope there is a special place in hades for them… </p>
<p>I hope that folks understand that compassion lives in Maine… there are folks who will stand up and get things put into place to help youngsters while others remain in denial and talk about “rights”… or stopping this behavior. There aren’t enough chaperones to keep dances safe, never mind this type of “it takes 2 to make a baby” behavior. </p>
<p>The media (TV, print, internet) constantly feed us images that weaken our stances. The jokes and dismissive barbs on shows like Two and a Half Men or any of the MTV reality shows constantly sell America on sex at any price. </p>
<p>Kids are listening and following suit…</p>
<p>Parents matter…stay engaged, involved and include yourself in your kids life. They may not want us with them, but they are not the boss of us!! Don’t think poorly of Portland, Maine for shedding light on this dark space…</p>
<p>^Honestly, I think Sex Ed can only do so much.</p>
<p>My Sex Ed teacher was very far from teaching abstinence only, but if kids don’t want to hear it, they won’t. And I don’t think it’s fair to blame it on the schools…since when do kids listen to what their teachers tell them?</p>
<p>I think that if they want to give their students birth control, then honestly, great. I think if the young kids are going to have sex, they should at least be protected (I am not in anyway advocating having sex at a young age, just that if they’re going to they need protection).</p>
<p>I think a better idea would be to have a sort of peer discussion group where there is open discussion about sex: how we are hit with it every day (as on MTV and such), why so many of us feel the need to have sex and have it often, different things we can do to protect ourselves, etc. I think that we are much more likely to listen to our peers than to a bunch of teachers. Now that being said, let me clarify: I love my teachers and I definitely listen to them. But I don’t think I’m really the norm…especially in that I’m saving myself for marriage.</p>
<p>Also, maineparent…I think forcing yourself on your kids is a mistake. Let me just say that I have a ton of respect for my parents because while they make it clear what they expect of me and they do enforce rules and curfews and such, otherwise they pretty much leave me alone, but I know that if I need them I can go to them. And I know that I wouldn’t have sex and not tell my mother; nor would I buy (or otherwise get) birth control without telling her. I think that by forcing your kids to tell you what’s going on, all you’re going to do is make them resentful and possibly get false answers. They have to want to talk to you.</p>
<p>Just trying to provide a perspective of a teen. ^_^</p>
<p>“My gut reaction is that no one wants to have to offer birth control to middle school kids…”</p>
<p>I do. </p>
<p>Some cultural context. Studies indicate that girls are sexually mature on average three years earlier than they were 100 years ago (boys, about 2 1/2 years), likely a result of better nutrition and environmental conditions. Schools were designed for the way kids were 100 years ago. But women are also marrying, on average, roughly 5 years later. So while 100 years ago, the average woman had about four years from sexual maturity until marriage, now it is closer to 12 years. In short, the period during which sex outside of marriage would be likely to occur has tripled. “Saving oneself for marriage” (I don’t exactly know what that means - if God didn’t mean folks to be sexually mature at age 13 She wouldn’t have made them that way) requires three times as many years of saving (without interest) than it did 100 years ago.</p>
<p>I think kids should be learning about birth control in elementary school, before it is an issue, and definitely before they become resistant to learning. I think teachers should be passing around condoms in third grade. Better, I think it should be taught explicitly in churches, synagogues, meetings, etc. But, and I think we have learned this already, we can’t trust the voluntary sector to do the job.</p>
<p>Actually, my church does teach sex. Every year or so, we have a series called “Good Sex”, where we have an entire weekend of open discussion about sex. It was the best Sex Ed I ever had…and I know several churches that do the same series.</p>
<p>Yikes. So what if girls are “sexually mature” (whatever that means) 3 years earlier. Isn’t the whole problem with kids having sex that they might become parents as a result of it? I, for one, see no benefit to our society for an 11 -13 year-old becoming a mother.</p>
<p>Obviously sex ed doesn’t reach all students, but a good program can do a lot at reducing STI and unwanted pregnancy rates. (I’m not sure on the statistics regarding how it impacts average age of first sexual experience.) Many programs also include ways that students can get birth control confidentially, such as at a routine doctor’s visit or through a clinic. Good programs also tend to include discussions about cultural norms, impacts from the media, etc.</p>
<p>EDIT:
In defense of Maineparent, I don’t think she was talking about forcing children to share everything with their parents. Parents should be engaged and involved in their children’s lives, even when typical middle school students push them away. That does not necessarily mean sharing private information or any “force” beyond strong encouragement. (I, for one, do not think it’s at all necessary for a child to share their sex life with their parents. I certainly didn’t tell my parents the first time I had sex–and I don’t think they would have wanted that information.)</p>
<p>^Yup…my doctor asks me everytime I go in there if I need birth control. I don’t go in with my mom anymore because I drive myself, but when I did go with my mom she would flat-out ask my mom to leave so she could talk to me about sexual issues. (My mom thought it was great. XD)</p>
<p>“Isn’t the whole problem with kids having sex that they might become parents as a result of it? I, for one, see no benefit to our society for an 11 -13 year-old becoming a mother.”</p>
<p>Yup. Precisely why they should be passing the condoms around in 3rd grade. The problem is NOT kids having sex. It’s kids becoming pregnant and contracting sexually transmitted diseases that is problematic.</p>
<p>There are sexually mature human beings who don’t have sex. (But not many - sexual expression among sexually mature human beings seems to be part of Her plan.)</p>
<p>I think there are emotional health issues involved, Mini, that you’re glossing over. Sexually mature children may not be (actually, they almost certainly won’t be) emotionally mature enough to handle the emotional factors involved in sexual activity and sexual intercourse.</p>