Home Sweet Simple Home

A tip

While on the topic of homeschooling and Flylady . . . . .

She has a spot dedicated to those "Flying while Homeschooling".
Click it and see if you can't implement some new tips and tricks to help like run just a little bit more smoothly.

Another question for Amy to ponder....

9:01 PM, 2007-Oct-18 .. Posted by Lynne

Amy,
Have you heard the news that three middle schools in Portland, ME will start giving out b*rth c*ntrol pills to girls as young as 11? Apparently the 3 middle schools have had 17 pregnancies among middle schoolers, and this does not include ab*rtions or miscarriages.
Your opinion, and why?
I know you won't like this, but I think it is probably a good thing. What I see in inner city Baltimore, if it is like Portland, is a culture that says it is ok to be s*xually active at that age, and men bear no responsibility for being fathers, marrying the mother, or supporting their children. In a culture where young girls get pregnant, have no prenatal care, and show up in the ER to deliver prematurely, I support giving these young girls b*rth c*ntrol.
Although it is tragic that they are s*xually active at this way too young age, it is worse for them to become mothers at age 12 and 13.

Edited by Amy W to prevent *strange* google searches.

Edited by YPAmy5 on 2007-Oct-19 at 10:46 AM

Untitled Comment

10:48 PM, 2007-Oct-18 .. Posted by Laura

me again... thanks for this link, and the Organized Home link... I just bookmarked both of them and hope to peruse them this weekend, when I'll have more time free to really grasp the concepts.

Lynne-

10:38 AM, 2007-Oct-19 .. Posted by YPAmy5

My gut reaction is NO! Don't give it to them. Do we really know how it is going to affect their bodies to be put on b.c. so young?
This is a very scary thing with no real black/white answers.
In one of our local school systems a few years back- an 11 yo girl was pregnant- but that's not the worst--- the worst was her mother was 12 yo when she had her- now making her a grandmother @ age 23. It boggles my mind. I was pregnant with my first child at 23!
Personally, it hurts my heart that children this young are s*xually active. And that is what they are- children!
I am reminded of the saying "Two wrongs don't make a right." Yes, it's wrong for them to be having s*x but is it right for "us" to supply them with b.c.? Are we helping or hindering?
I know this wouldn't even be an issue if every child had a family- parents that cared and truly raised and taught their children- ah, a perfect world. But we live in a fallen world and this is just one of numerous consequences of living in this world.
So do we give them the b.c. and seem to give the "o.k." for them to be s*xually active or do we not make it available and have young girls getting pregnant and all the health and social problems that comes with that?
Ugh- what ugly choices. It's as if one is asking- would you rather lose and arm or a leg? Personally, I'd like to keep both appendages- but that wasn't one of my choices was it?
There doesn't seem to be an answer that satisfies me- there shouldn't even be a need to be handing out b.c. There just shouldn't.
Even worst- in this day and age- getting pregnant is one of the smaller worries- so many diseases and such can harm these girls and scar them for life (physically and mentally) and they don't even think of that- b.c. won't protect them from all of that.
It's just a band-aid on a huge gaping wound.