I just found out my cousin is pregnant. She got married a little over a month ago. They both work low paying part time jobs with no health insurance. She said she was using the "rhythm method." Apparently, it didn't work.
Yes, she waited until marriage to have sex...but couldn't she have benefited from a sex ed class that taught her a little more about pregnancy and adequate means of contraception?
2007-09-22 12:12:38 · 19 answers · asked by Priscilla B 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I'm quite certain that she is aware of the existence of condoms. A class probably wouldn't have been necessary just to tell her that. What troubles me is that she thought the rhythm method was a reliable way of preventing pregnancy. Sadly, I'm guessing she's not the only young person with this misconception.
2007-09-22 12:19:46 · update #1
This isn't meant to be a judgement on my cousin. It's more of a judgement on a system that values keeping young people in the dark instead of equiping them with valuable family planning knowledge. Yes, children are wonderful. It's just sad to see her struggling when she thought she was taking proper precautions.
2007-09-22 12:27:05 · update #2
obsolete prof- it's not the abstinence I have a problem with. That very well might have been a good call. It's the abstinence ONLY sexual education. I really think we should make sure young people have accurate knowledge of what is and isn't a reliable form of birth control.
2007-09-22 12:31:52 · update #3
Every single verifiable study ever published has shown that comprehensive sex education reduces unintended pregnancies and STD's WITHOUT causing people to initiate sex at a younger age, have more sex partners, etc. etc.
Abstinence education has led to higher rates of STD's, more unintended pregnancies, and has totally failed to keep teenagers from being sexually active.
2007-09-22 12:59:52 · answer #1 · answered by Steve-O 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am having difficulty understanding your question. Apparently, she knew enough about the sex function to know that she most likely would get pregnant if she had sex, that's probably why she waited to get married before taking the chance that she might pregnant. Rhythm method or not, she let God's will rule her life. I don't see how the abstinence can be seen as having a negative effect, Christian or not, with all the people who wind up asking for help on Yahoo Answers when they start having green gunk drip out of their private parts from getting involved with people who have been around the world, so to speak. Read fast, because when I speak the truth, I always get blocked.
2007-09-22 12:26:04 · answer #2 · answered by obsolete professor 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Abstinence only sex ed works rather well actually. In the African countries that teach Abstinence only, AIDS rates have decreased dramatically.
The "rhythm method" is an outdated method doesn't always work. I recommend "Natural Family Planning".
Lastly I question your assumption that your cousin was negatively impacted by becoming pregnant. How can a beautiful new life be negative? Your cousin has been blessed!
2007-09-22 12:20:14 · answer #3 · answered by Dysthymia 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The rhythm method of birth control is the least effective method other than no birth control method. People DO need more sex education than abstinence. They also DO need to know the benefits of choosing abstinence (and there are benefits). Sex education taught in a respectful manner does not have to increase the likelihood that people will have premarital sex. It may do that when taught without values training, but accurate information accompanied by values training should not increase premarital sex.
2007-09-22 12:21:40 · answer #4 · answered by javadic 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
absolutely. You didn't say if she attended a conservative Christian sschool or not. If she did, the school is entitled to teach abstinance only--although its unwise for exactly the reasons you give.
If it was a public school, this is illegal. Abstinance only sex ed is a religious practice--and teaching in accord with one groups religious beliefs is a violation of the Constitution.
2007-09-22 12:31:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think it does any good to mince the facts with people. An informed person at least has the tools to make a well-educated choice. Ignorance can only lead to bad choices, except by dumb luck. The facts, unfortunately, show that abstinence-only sex education (i.e. witholding the facts from kids) leads to higher rates of STD's and higher rates of sexual activity, just lower rates of vaginal intercourse. That's bad for the kids and bad for society.
Peace to you.
2007-09-22 12:34:59 · answer #6 · answered by Orpheus Rising 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Why would something GOOD affect anyone negatively?
Sex is for marriage ONLY. When people engage in sex and aren't married, somebody always gets hurt. What's good about THAT.
Save it for the one you will spend your life with. What a beautiful gift to give each other!
God bless!
2007-09-22 12:26:05 · answer #7 · answered by Devoted1 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
how do you figure? abstinence only is the one, surefired way that people can avoid diseases and unwanted pregnancies, wouldn't you agree?
sex education is not just about how to avoid pregancy, but about how our bodies work - something your cuz probably needed to know, especially when using one of the more "natural" methods.
but don't judge her. a baby is always a blessing...she might have to struggle a bit financially, but it sounds like she's got a man who works and will do his best for her, don't you think?
2007-09-22 12:19:27 · answer #8 · answered by chieko 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Abstinence based sex ed did not lead to this scenario that yiou describe, so it is not parallel logic.
Any responsible natural family planning program is teaching the Sympto thermal method not rhythm method. The rhythm method has not been taken seriously since the 60's i would guesstimate.
2007-09-22 12:17:37 · answer #9 · answered by Makemeaspark 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
She would have benefited from having parents who are responsible for their children and teaching them about the the reality of sex and it's consequences.
Yet another example that people are not responsible enough to have children.
Teach your own children. Don't expect "society" to do it.
2007-09-22 12:20:30 · answer #10 · answered by Mystine G 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋