Quote:
Originally Posted by timmgirvan
GR: A friend of mines' sister had surgery for cervical cancer at the age of 20! This was brought on by a very active sexual lifestyle(I'm not makin this up). I don't know all about STD's or Warts. I wouldn't want young girls to get them, but I draw the line at the people routinely making these kinds of decisions for our kids. I believe that these plans Do give implicit consent for young people to feel free to experience/experiment with things they're not ready for physically or emotionally. But I will read up on this and add to this thread if I find anything interesting! P.S. I checked on WebMD and genital warts are considered an STD,passed on by sexual activity. So when you have the warts, if they're not treated, then they can become potentially cancerous. It did not mention what percentage of girls/women would be at risk(for the warts to become cancerous) So...the whole 11 year old girls having sex thing? Why would we even be having this issue if Parents(not the school system) dealt with 1)the 'birds/bees' and 2)Authorities and school system taught this as a prerequisite for graduation from(I'll give you a break)8th grade. No one is concealing any info, and by the way, all the stuff you need to know is in BOOKS. I went to private school, so I read books. In the 60's, nobody was forthcoming about sex....there's nothing 'prurient' about biology! Routine exams for young girls would be common sense, not giving thema shot or a pill so that "they can all they can be"!
|
But Timm, NOT giving them a shot that would protect them against cervical cancer caused by genital warts is using a fear tactic. Which is morally reprehensible, as far as I'm concerned. And since your 20-year-old acquaintance still had the surgery, it clearly didn't work in her case- the fear tactic, that is. So are you glad she had cancer surgery because that taught her a lesson?
Timm, you also went to school some time ago-- have you checked into Bush's abstinence only sex ed recently? And have you checked the success rates on it? Google and you'll find some interesting stuff on what a colossal waste of money it's been. Kids aren't getting the sex ed you and I got.
Speaking as a woman who was going to the gyno long before I had sex (my mom died of breast cancer when she was 35 so my dad started sending me to the gyno at age 13), cervical exams are fracking painful if you still have a hymen (I still remember my first exam after I'd become sexually active and it was a truly beautiful moment not to leave the office in tears from the pain). It's pretty abusive to suggest giving girls routine cervical exams rather than a shot, don't you think?
Timm, one still has to contend with, oh, herpes, AIDS, chlamydia, gonorreha, crabs, etc. if one has unprotected sex. And of course, the big P. (pregnancy) To say giving girls a shot that might save their lives due to one virus will promote promiscuity is a wee bit extremist, don't you think?
If the vaccine is offered to your kids' kids, will you tell your kids not to let their daughters get it?
You also, I assume from your line about drawing the line about other people making these kinds of decisions for kids, are opposed to measles, mumps, rubella and tetanus vaccinations? Kids are required to get those to go to school. Did you kids get them?
Speaking as someone who saw her mom die of cancer, it sucks. Anything as simple as a vaccine for at least one kind of cancer is a good thing and should be available to all girls. Period.