Letters to the editor

Laura Beeson wrote a very good letter regarding the folly of providing birth control pills in high school using tax money. That's even worse than building day care centers in high schools at taxpayer's expense.

However, she fails to preach to the right people on this issue. The principals and Superintendent are merely playing a political game, and don't give a damn one way or the other. It is her fellow students that she needs to be addressing with this serious issue.

Yes, Laura, there are too many of your peers that apparently cannot control themselves when it comes to having sex. Anytime, any place.

Jerry, You guys are paid to do a job and a pay check is your thank you.

Gene, Paul Wolfowitz in an answer to a specific question from congress stated that the Iraqi oil revenues could pay for the Iraqi war RECONSTRUCTION. No one ever said that Iraqi oil would pay us back.

Wish you liked researching as much as you like writing. The above is not the only error in your letter.

Wow, a teenager speaks out against the lack of morals as evidenced by the 'need' for family planning services in schools and she gets bashed by two 'adults'. I applaud her coming forward and saying what many of us have said before. We are not doing anyone a service by allowing them to obtain family planning services without parental knowledge or consent. We are telling them it is ok to do whatever you want; we will be here to take care of you, regardless of what you parents want.

Judas, your comment is part of the problem. Maybe if less kids were getting laid, we wouldn't need birth control, or any of the other services provided by these clinics. It is refreshing to see a young person with morals.

Evelyn, if the administrators would stop playing political games, maybe the parents would be forced to take responsibility for their children. With everyone complaining about the decline of education, it seems counterproductive to pay for health clinics in the schools that provide birth control, STD testing, pregnancy testing, and advice and assistance for abortions. Shouldn't that money go toward actual education? Let the parents figure out how to deal with their daughter coming home pregnant or their son coming home with an STD. Those issues are not the fault, or responsibility, of the school.

While I must say that Ms. Beeson is very well spoken, she has failed to realize something very important - the reality of the world we live in. She assumes that the role of the schools is to teach morals. Morals in general are a result of ones prospective. I am not sure if Ms. Beeson is disguising religion by using the word morals, but I would not doubt it. Schools have no place teaching morals (or religion), as this needs to be determined by the individual - and since we are speaking of students, their parents as well. Of course we do not think the youth is a horde of animals lacking control! Reality will show us that people of this age will make their own decisions, whether they line up with Ms. Beeson's moral values or not. Therefore, a public facility such as a high school should indeed aid one in making a safe choice when one decides to be sexually active. That choice is safe sex, which will undoubtedly prevent pregnancy and STS's.

How can we not attribute increased pregnancy rates to the lack of reproductive services. If one does not have the ability to acquire contraceptive, and one decides to have sex, then ones risk of getting pregnant are significantly increased. Simple logic explains that access to contraceptive will undoubtedly prevent pregnancy and STD's.

Ms. Beeson explains the negative side effect of birth control medications. The status quo is that every medication has side effects, so I will assume that Ms. Beeson is against the prescribing of any medication because of the possibility of negative side effects.

Finally, we have the money issue. I, for one, agree that more money should be injected into the public schools. However, this should not be done at the expense of offering contraception. I believe that if we have a high rate of teen pregnancies, more money will go to public welfare programs. I also see no problem with preventing the spread of disease. Ms. Beeson, while I certainly do not doubt you as a future parent, please consider one thing:

Considering your stance on contraception, I am assuming that you are against sex during teenage years, and probably out of wedlock. Perhaps you spawn a child that does not feel the same way when they reach your current age. Suppose the child does not want to discuss sex with you because of your stance. Suppose your child will not ask you for condoms. Suppose your child does not have any cash to buy them. Suppose there is no free program in place in their high school to obtain contraception. Suppose your child becomes pregnant, or is infected with HIV.

Would your stance change? I would hope that your high moral values would allow you to see the injustice done to your child. I hope you would be able to see the benefits of a program which prevents countless pregnancies and devastating STD's.

Ryan,
The "reality" of this world is able to be defied. That's the whole point I was making with in my letter. If we keep holding students to the level of mediocrity, that's what we are going to get. The reality is that morals are not being taught. I did not confuse religion and morals once in my article, and was careful not to confuse the two. If you notice, I did not say it was a sin to have sex, as someone religious would; I said it was serious to have sex, as I think all can agree.

Reality does show that we all make our own decisions, and I completely agree. The question I ask is why should we ALL pay for someone else's decisions? Furthermore, by making contraceptives accessible, you encourage sex. Contraceptives are seen never to fail, however! Did you know that 89% percent of women who do not want to get pregnant are already using a form of contraceptive? So what now? Abortion? Fear? Perhaps if they were taught the risks and education about sex before, this would not happen in the first place. Seems so simple, yet it's not happening.

If my child still became pregnant after I have taught them the facts and how serious and precious sex is, I would hope I could see this child as a blessing. So much good can come out of a bad situation, yet we are teaching our mothers, like I have previously stated, that pregnancy is a disease. On the issue of STD's, the rise in STD's and other types of sex related illnesses is so tragic. However, could it be that contraceptives are so easily accessible that they are pushing women and men to have sex more often, therefore making it even more common and widespread? Like I stated before, without the use of birth control, both partners no longer feel invincible, and are much more careful. Without this security blanket, the seriousness of sex is again restored.

I thank you immensely for your response on my article. If you have anymore questions or comments feel free to respond.

Birth control is legal and should be widely available, including to sexually active teens. As for Ms. Beeson, get thee to a nunnery, as you have a fine future ahead as the Church Lady.

Reality is indeed able to be defied, and I must say I am always supportive of a push torward the better. I am glad to hear that we are not talking religion - I apologize for my hasty assumption. I like to consider myself an optimist, so I wish I could believe that removing contraception from schools would have a significant impact on sexual relations within the younger community. I also believe that in order for one to be an effective optimist, one must first be a realist. Sex is indeed a serious issue. It would be great if everyone looked at it that way. However, the seriousness of sex is a matter of opinion. Some people believe sex is casual, purely physical, and meaningless. Who are we to say that they are wrong? Who are we to say that we are right?

We cannot base an entire health policy purely on opinion and morals. You said at first that this was a moral issue - I believe this is a health issue. If a child defies their parent and has sex and lies about it, that is a moral issue. Providing contraception to someone who chooses to use it is a health issue. I find it hard to believe that unprotected sex specifically "casual" sex) is healther than using protection.

Sex education is very important - especially with an emphasis on risks. Of course, we must be careful not to insert opinionated morals into a scientific lesson.

You mentioned that 89% of women who do not want to get pregnant are already using contraception. Does that not make you wonder why 1 in 10 women who do not want to get pregnant are doing to prevent it?

Pregnancy can indeed be a blessing, but can also be a heartbreaking burden depending on the circumstances. While I do not think that pregnancy is a disease, I don't think everyone who is sexually active wants or can handle having a child. I would rather provide someone contraception than hear about a baby being left in a garbage can beause its mother could not care for it.

I have never read facts that say contraception causes people to have sex, nor have I ever heard anyone say, "I just got a free condom, that makes me want to have sex." Although anything is possible, I just can't subscribe to that train of thought.

You mentioned abortion somewhere in your last post, but that is a completely different argument all together. I appreciate the response, and would love to see another!

Ciao!

I love it when teens are as well spoken and as obviously intelligent as Ms. Beeson is. Huzzah to you! However not all teens ARE as intelligent, or responsible. Not all parents will step up to the plate and teach their children what is acceptable, and there isn't really a way to force them, much as we'd all like to.

Laura Beeson, lets see how you feel after you become pregnant after that one moment of 'moral weakness'. Bet you wished you used BC then.

Judas,

I suggest you get thee to a lawyer's office to learn better arguments. Since when has something being legal meant it should be available?

Being defensive and quoting Shakespeare has never changed anything.

Laura

Laura,

Why do you find it so threatening that your peers might make different choices than you do? If your opinion is that the best place for women is barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen, because birth control is unavailable, then by all means, don't use birth control, and you will surely find yourself in that position some day. But don't wish that outcome on everyone else, or even anyone else.

Did I ever say that I was against birth control? I was against it being provided by the schools with tax dollars. Would you rage if we used taxes to buy bibles for everyone? I do not wish anyone to be in a kitchen barefoot and pregnant, although this steriotype is a wee bit ridiculous. I'm saying that if 89% of people who get pregnant are already on some type of birth control, then obviously the problem is not the availability.

Judas wrote:

Laura,
Why do you find it so threatening that your peers might make different choices than you do? If your opinion is that the best place for women is barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen, because birth control is unavailable, then by all means, don't use birth control, and you will surely find yourself in that position some day. But don't wish that outcome on everyone else, or even anyone else.

So, you don't mind your tax dollars going toward a family planning clinic in schools? You don't mind helping to pay for teenagers to get birth control, pregnancy or STD testing, and counseling? How would you feel if your tax dollars went to pay for school supplies for students whose parents can't afford them? Or for a Bible in every room? Or a Qur'an in every room?

I have no problem with paying taxes toward things that improve public health and are not prohibited by the Constitution. All of the things that YOU mentioned are so prohibited.

Judas wrote:

I have no problem with paying taxes toward things that improve public health and are not prohibited by the Constitution. All of the things that YOU mentioned are so prohibited.

But, aren't all the things I mentioned the responsibility of the parent to provide their children? Why is it ok to provide birth control and counseling for sex related issues, at the tax payer expense without consent of the parents or even without informing them? Do you want your children turning to strangers for that advice? Do you really not mind paying taxes for other children to turn to strangers for that advice? Aren't kids supposed to be going to school to learn, not get free birth control? And just how is taxes paying for school supplies, at the school level, different from paying for birth control and pregnancy tests, at the school level? Seems to me the school supplies belong in the school more than B/C and tests for STDs and pregnancy.

It would indeed be nice to have more funds going towards educational materials. Lets not forget that we have a multi-billion dollar war going on right now thanks to our conservative presidtent. I'm sure he would love to follow the agenda of no contraception and more books - but he is worried about the war. In the mean time, I have no problem having a few pennies of mine going toward preventing unwanted pregnancies and STD's. I see no problem with a person consulting a health professional when it comes to a health issue. Again, parents can teach what they want to their children, but as we all know, teenagers may not always follow their parents guidance.'Fed Up'... would you like to see a community plagues with teenagers suffering from STD's? I know I don't. Would you like to see more abandoned, or drowned babies because you girls are having babies they can't care for? I don't. If a teenager does not feel comfortable talking about sex with their parents, would you rather have them talk to nobody instead of a health professional? I wouldn't. Your ideas are great in a world where teens obey what their parents say 100% of the time. Your ideas are also great in a world where all parents properly supervise and educate their children. However, we do not live in this world. This world has NEVER functioned this way. For you to assume this is foolish and ignorant. Instead of arguing against a solution to a potentially devastating problem - why don't you think outside the box and see the world we live in. Perhaps you are fed up because you are trying to live in a dream world that does not exist. Perhaps you are fed up because you refuse to accept realistic solutions to realistic problems. Perhaps you are fed up because nobody agrees with your clearly skewed view of the world.

Open up your mind and simply be realistic....here is a break down for you in case you have trouble. Tax dollars helping to avoid health crisis = good. Tax dollars used for funding education = also good. Lets do more of both of these two things... While we're at it. Pay teachers more = more high quality staff at schools. Abolish no child left behind = our schools can make progress again. Stop the war in Iraq = billions of dollars to fund better causes.

You see, there are many things we can do to improve education while still providing health counseling. Again, I ask you to refer to reality and learn how sex is viewed by SOME teens. You seem to be blinded by the usual rhetoric of the right. Providing is not a political issue, it is not a moral issue. It is a HEALTH ISSUE! What about promoting health and safety offends you so much? And as far as your precious pennies being "wasted" on contraception... get real! If we have a sudden spike in teen pregnancies and STD's, where do you think public health and welfare programs get their money from?? Surely someone of your intelligence knows that a baby is much more expensive than a few condoms.

That being said, open your eyes a bit and change your name to, "Getting Real in NM" You might learn a thing or two, and won't be so fed up.

Yes I know that a child is more expensive than condoms. As a school employee, I also know that many students are having sex at younger ages than ever. I also believe in keeping the children safe and healthy. But, why does a child have to have a parent signature to get an Advil but that same child can get free B/C, STD testing, and advice on sex related problems without even notifying the parent? Whatever happened to teens going to the county health clinic? Do we really need to pay twice for the same service? Is it fair to the parents or children to help them sneak around behind their parents back? I am not offended by promoting health and safety. I am offended that we expect parents to be more involved with their children's education yet we have no problem excluding them from their children's sexual issues. I am offended that we complain about parents that don't fill out the emergency card that would allow us to give their child Advil, but we could care less how they feel about us giving them birth control. We complain about the waste of time and money spent on CRT testing, but we are more than happy to spend the same time and money, if not more, on pregnancy and STD testing. Are the schools here to educate the children or are we here to serve as health clinics? Shouldn't we be more concerned with the fact that many of our graduates can't read or do math at grade level?
My eyes are wide open. I am 'real'. I deal with kids in the schools every day. I would much rather help a child improve their reading skills than hand out free condoms. As a parent, I do not want my children to be able to get from strangers what they should be getting from me. It is the job of parents to ensure the health and welfare of their children. It is the job of the schools to teach them reading, math, science, etc. A little help on both sides is nice, but the roles should not be reversed. If they are to be reversed, then at least notify the parents. Maybe I wouldn't be so fed up if our society wasn't so messed up.

I'm tired, so lets make this simple:

"Many students are having sex at younger ages than ever" - this is exactly why we need to make sure they are doing it safely.

Advil is a drug, condoms and STD testing are not drugs. Condoms prevent diseases, Advil fights headaches - which one is more important?

Children are going to sneak behind their parents backs, lets make sure they are having safe sex if they decide to have sex.

CRT testing is a waste of time and money. However, being inflicted with disease or a pregnancy you cannot handle is devastating, so we should focus on preventing it.

A school is made for educating. A community should aim to be safe, and healthy. A community should also utilize its public facilities to promote health and safety.

Sure, we should be concerned with the fact some graduates cannot read or write at a sufficient level. However, I fail to see how providing safe sex methods is making people dumber. After all, shouldn't parents be helping their children. I am sure they are, but some kids don't listen... And some do not apply the teachings of their parents. Same goes for sex, and is why we need to provide people with BC, etc.

Schools are indeed there primarily to teach. Did you know that schools also rally youth to volunteer, are a fundamental part of social development, provide counseling for children, teach fire safety... The schools are not limited to teaching books - they aid in the development of young members of the community. Promoting safe sex practices aids in the development of a healthy community.

You say you don't want your child to get from a stranger what they should get from you. Again visiting reality... If they know you don't want to give it to them, they will get it somewhere else if that is really what they want. Be it drugs, alcohol, a burger, condoms, etc. etc. etc. They will get it - wouldn't you rather it be from a health professional?

Ryan wrote:

I'm tired, so lets make this simple:
"Many students are having sex at younger ages than ever" - this is exactly why we need to make sure they are doing it safely.
Advil is a drug, condoms and STD testing are not drugs. Condoms prevent diseases, Advil fights headaches - which one is more important?
Children are going to sneak behind their parents backs, lets make sure they are having safe sex if they decide to have sex.
CRT testing is a waste of time and money. However, being inflicted with disease or a pregnancy you cannot handle is devastating, so we should focus on preventing it.
A school is made for educating. A community should aim to be safe, and healthy. A community should also utilize its public facilities to promote health and safety.
Sure, we should be concerned with the fact some graduates cannot read or write at a sufficient level. However, I fail to see how providing safe sex methods is making people dumber. After all, shouldn't parents be helping their children. I am sure they are, but some kids don't listen... And some do not apply the teachings of their parents. Same goes for sex, and is why we need to provide people with BC, etc.
Schools are indeed there primarily to teach. Did you know that schools also rally youth to volunteer, are a fundamental part of social development, provide counseling for children, teach fire safety... The schools are not limited to teaching books - they aid in the development of young members of the community. Promoting safe sex practices aids in the development of a healthy community.
You say you don't want your child to get from a stranger what they should get from you. Again visiting reality... If they know you don't want to give it to them, they will get it somewhere else if that is really what they want. Be it drugs, alcohol, a burger, condoms, etc. etc. etc. They will get it - wouldn't you rather it be from a health professional?

Although a headache is not as 'serious' as an STD or unplanned pregnancy, a headache is not brought on by choice. I agree that not all children feel comfortable talking to their parents about sex topics; mine do and all children should. The fact that they can't falls back on the parents, not the schools. Encouraging community involvement in schools is not the same as providing family planning services. There is still the county health clinic, which is still free to the users and paid for by tax money.

On this subject we will just have to agree to disagree. I do see the clinics serving a purpose. I am just disappointed that our society is ok with the need for them. I want, and expect, better for my children. Unfortunately, there are a great number of parents in this city who don't.

Have a great day and enjoy the rest of your week. I have to go back to work, so if we are to continue this discussion, it will have to be in the evenings.