When to start the pill…
Posted
September 12, 2007 at
11:18 am by
Jessica
I have to admit, I was shocked when I read about a mother who allowed her 13 year old daughter to go on the pill:
When Tracey Baverstock realised her 13-year-old daughter Connie was having sex, she didn’t shout or scream. She took her straight to the doctor to put her on the Pill.
Having already seen two of her daughters become teenage mums, Tracey, 39, from Portsmouth, was determined it wasn’t going to happen again.
Granted, a new study was just released that supports a decrease in cancer rates in women who were on the pill. The rub? The advantage only lasted for 8 years, after that, cancer risk increased exponentially.
So what in the world is this mother thinking?
I’ve never once regretted putting Connie on the Pill. I didn’t condone the fact that she was having sex - far from it. Of course I was upset. I was shocked - my little girl was only 13.
But having me rant and rave at Connie not to have sex wasn’t going to stop her, she’s a headstrong teenager. I was also aware of her getting very jealous of the attention given to my other daughters Sheri and Joleen when they were pregnant.
Is she serious? Her 13 year old was headstrong and going to have sex anyway? Isn’t that when that crazy little thing called parenting is supposed to kick in? I mean really, can you think of a better time to utilize parenting skills than this? If your 13 year old wants to have sex and your answer is, “Ah, well. What am I going to do about it,” you may want to re-evaluate when you went wrong.
Here’s a crazy suggestion…keep her home! At 13, you should be able to have some control over your kid. Whose parenting who here???
Tags: 13-year-old, birth-control-pill, Parenting, parenting-skills, teen-pregnancy |
26 Responses to “When to start the pill…”
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately in an effort to remove commercial messages, irrelevancies, excessive foul language, racist/sexist/hateful comments, spoofed/cloaked IPs and/or personal attacks and will be edited/deleted at our discretion. Thank you for your patience.
1. Rita said:
September 12, 2007 @ 12:28 pm
Welllll…..I think that it’s more than just asserting authority right then. Yes, obivously, something went very wrong somewhere along the line and needs to be fixed, but honestly, it didn’t happen overnight that the kid fell off track and it’s not going to be fixed overnight. So, as a safety net, while working to get her kid back on track, being on the pill might not be a bad idea.
After that, I think the first thing I’d do is move. Far away. Not connect it to the sex issue though (because then with a kid like that you might have knee-jerk rebellion and have the kid try to run away back to her old friends). I’d let some time pass, and introduce the move as a totally independent thing, and then start new rules in the new place. But, that’s just me.
2. Rita said:
September 12, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
But, yeah, this lady has had two daughters become teenage moms, so well….there ya go.
3. Joel Maners said:
September 12, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
If this woman or any of us for that mater, are going to tell a teenager not to have sex when their bodies are telling them to do exactly that, we are going to have to answer the question, “Why not?” Answers centered around AIDS, Herpies, and other STDs aren’t going to make much of a difference when there are condoms, birth control pills and medications available. So once you take the medical issues off the table, how do you answer the question? Is there any reason to save sex for marriage anymore. Is virginity just an old fashioned idea that needs to be done away with? As parents, we need to come up with a more robust reason than just, “It’s not in your best interests.” Kids are smarter than we give them credit for.
4. Rita said:
September 12, 2007 @ 1:13 pm
I, actually hope that my children will not be virgins when they marry. I think marriage is hard enough, but adding the expectations of the ONLY sexual partner is just a recipe for dissatisfaction, I think.
Honestly, at 13 (my son will be 13 in six weeks), my kids won’t have time for sex. I expect they’re supervised in the school (if I found out that one of my kids was having sex during school hours, there’d be a lawsuit). The school is responsible for their wherabouts during school hours. After school, they’re with me. They have a range of supervised activities throughout the evenings and weekends. I intend to keep a short leash on my young teens for a while. Yes, you have to lengthen it and lengthen it, giving them the opportunity to prove their responsibility, but YOU should be monitoring it along the way. The relationship between the kid and the parents determines how the kid will feel about this kind of supervision, too. Where we are, and the people we associate with mostly, are the kinds of people who have close relationships with their teenage kids and things like sex and drugs are discussed openly and honestly and guess what? The kids don’t do drugs and don’t have sex.
Early sex and drug use is often a result of combined low self esteem and peer pressure. A single kid might be able to hide drugs and sex from his or her parents, but if the parents know all the kids in the peer group and all the parents in the peer group, then it’s really hard for a whole GROUP of kids to hide that kind of activity from all the involved adults, KWIM?
As far as what to tell them about sex itself? I feel that sex is for adults. There are studies upon studies done on the detriments to teenage sex–physical and psychological detriments. At 18ish, I feel a person is about ready to commit to a monogomous relationship and delve into intimacy. When I say I hope my kids aren’t virgins when they marry, it doesn’t mean I hope they’re promiscuous, either. Ideally, I’d like them to have a series of committed, monogomous relationships through their early adulthood and then settle down into marriage in the mid-to-late 20’s. That’s what I hope.
5. Jessica said:
September 12, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
[quote comment="108691"]If this woman or any of us for that mater, are going to tell a teenager not to have sex when their bodies are telling them to do exactly that,[/quote]
Surely you’re not suggesting that most 13 year old’s bodies are telling them to have sex. (???)
6. Rita said:
September 12, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
I guess since at that age, reproduction is possible, and back in like Biblical times, people started reproducing at something like 13, I can see how people would think that. I’ve heard that argument before, but in the light of the way things are now, and with our life expectancy, reputable studies show that kids that young should not be having sex–pregnancy and STD risk aside.
7. allena tapia said:
September 17, 2007 @ 8:54 am
“(if I found out that one of my kids was having sex during school hours, there’d be a lawsuit”
Sorry, but high school and middle school is WAY past the point where each child is babysat 8 hours a day, and um, that’s not their job either. Their job is to teach not to babysit, and your job is to instill values so that they don’t need to babysit. I have heard of MANY teachers discovering hot and heavy high schoolers in out of the way stairways. It happens. If it happens to my kid, there wouldn’t be a lawsuit involved, instead I’d have to realize I messed up somewhere and if I wanted 8 hours a day babysitting, I’d consider homeschooling.
8. allena tapia said:
September 17, 2007 @ 8:55 am
“Surely you’re not suggesting that most 13 year old’s bodies are telling them to have sex. (???)”
Absolutely they are. How is this even a question? Most children have already at least BEGUN puberty, which includes all those hormones, to varying degrees.
9. Jessica said:
September 17, 2007 @ 2:49 pm
[quote comment="109397"]“Surely you’re not suggesting that most 13 year old’s bodies are telling them to have sex. (???)”
Absolutely they are. How is this even a question? Most children have already at least BEGUN puberty, which includes all those hormones, to varying degrees.[/quote]
Children have sex at this age because they are either being encouraged to do so or because of peer pressure. I can only speak from experience, but when my friends and I turned 13, we weren’t like, “Okay, I need/want to have sex.”
I disagree that 13 yr. olds innately want to have sex. There is a reason why age of consent laws don’t include 13 yr. olds.
10. Serena said:
September 17, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
If by innately, you mean born and directed by their bodies, then you are wrong. If you are referring to mentally, emotionally, you may be right. But yes, 13 year olds generally have hormones by this age. And when you and I turned 13, we may have not gone out and had sex, but our bodies most certainly were changing & having urges, curiosities, showing interest in the opposite sex. Just amtter of how far they MENTALLY and EMOTIONALLY take it. But, uhhh, yeah, sorry but most 13 years old should have started producing sex hormones by now.
11. Rita said:
September 17, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
[quote comment="109396"]
Sorry, but high school and middle school is WAY past the point where each child is babysat 8 hours a day, and um, that’s not their job either. [/quote]
No, their legal obligation is to keep the children in their trust safe. We hand over our children every day to the people in the school. Supervision is part of that trust. The kids are supposed to be accounted for at all times–if not in class, then in the library (where they are accounted for) or the bathroom (which should be a limited amount of time). My kids’ schools have closed campus lunch until the 11th grade, too. At that age, they’re 16/17 and that becomes a different ballgame. If my kids are caught making out in a stairway, it means they’re somewhere they’re not supposed to be, and I should be alerted to that.
12. Jessica said:
September 17, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
[quote comment="109477"]And when you and I turned 13, we may have not gone out and had sex, but our bodies most certainly were changing & having urges, curiosities, showing interest in the opposite sex.[/quote]
Having an interest or curiosity in the opposite sex doesn’t mean that a child automatically wants to have sex. And even if they did, it’s unhealthy and a generalization I do not agree with. Many 13 year olds are “flirting” with the idea of having a boyfriend/girlfriend but are not interested in having sex with them.
Your argument is same argument sex offenders and pedophiles make when arguing to lower the age of consent, BTW.
13. Simona said:
September 25, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
People who think that their kids are in a teacher’s sight all day are pulling the wool over their own eyes, and people who think that their 13 year olds don’t have physical urges are fooling themselves. And the pedophile comment is the stupidest argument I’ve read today. I lol’d!
14. Rita said:
September 26, 2007 @ 10:36 am
[quote comment="111238"]People who think that their kids are in a teacher’s sight all day are pulling the wool over their own eyes, and people who think that their 13 year olds don’t have physical urges are fooling themselves. And the pedophile comment is the stupidest argument I’ve read today. I lol’d![/quote]
1) Am I “pulling the wool over my eyes” to believe that my 3′d grader receives adequate supervision? How about a kindergartener? Why is it so unbelievable to expect that the same amount of supervision would be granted my 7th grader? He’s in their care all day long, they are supposed to be supervising him. Yes, there are times in the hallway (with 250 other kids changing classes) or in one of the two boys’ bathrooms (where there are always a dozen other boys) where they are not actively supervised, but the presence of other kids makes sex or drugs unlikely.
Granted, some kids cut classes or are routinely tardy, and undesirable behaviors could be happening during those times, but I’d expect that if my son were cutting classes or habitually tardy, that I’d hear about it. I know I would. We’re supposed to call our kids in sick by 8 am, and one time (ONE time) we had an emergency with another kid and both of us forgot to call him in. We were at the hospital with our other child and my cell phone rang–the school was following up with where my son was. They had tried my home phone number, then dh’s work phone number, then dh’s cell phone (which he had turned off) and finally my cell phone (which I had not turned off in the hospital, oops), so they were very diligent about reaching us to find out if our kid was out on an excused absence or if he’d been abducted or just being a delinquent.
So, if you don’t trust that YOUR middle/junior high school is providing that amount of supervision, I’d advise YOU to do something about the structure at that school. Mine is fine.
2) Yes, kids after puberty have urges. Acting upon them is an entirely different thing.
3) And yes, suggesting that children want to act upon those urges and engage in sexual activity (or that kids before puberty want to engage in sexual activity) is a new tactic used by sexual predators. Absolutely.
15. Jessica said:
September 27, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
Rita, I was going to respond to Ms. Simona but decided that she just wasn’t going to “get it”.
I’m glad I didn’t because your response was so spot on — it’s agree with Rita day!
16. Allena said:
September 27, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
ISP log says…: Jessica and Rita are probably the same person, it’s so easy to agree with yourself!
I just spent a morning in an elementary school. During lunch, I was working in the deserted library and a third grader, whose mom I knew, wandered by out in the hall after using the restroom & stopped and talked to me for 10 minutes. No one came and got her, no one missed her, and no one thought she was in any danger, since schools are locked down these days anyway. it was her lunch time, she was under the care of 3 lunch aides supervising 100 children. So, what’s the likelyhood that horny teenagers could easily slip away for 10 minutes?- pretty darn good. If I remember correctly, I did it myself back in the 90s. FYI: If you are late to class 10 minutes in high school, no one calls your mom. I learned that first hand.
And I agree, the pedophile comment is pretty funny…and completely unsubstantiated.
17. Prescott said:
September 27, 2007 @ 2:50 pm
[quote comment="111599"]ISP log says…: Jessica and Rita are probably the same person, it’s so easy to agree with yourself![/quote]
Talk about funny and unsubstantiated!
As someone who actually has access to the IP logs, I can verify that they are not the same person. I know, I know, your huge ego can’t process that more than one person might think differently than you, but try — come on, I know you can do it!
18. Rita said:
September 27, 2007 @ 3:01 pm
If you notice, I haven’t made any claims about the supervision of high school students. That’s a different ball park, although in my experience, the rigidity and enforcement of rules (hall passes, tardiness, etc) is higher for grades 9 and 10 than 11 and 12. By grade 12, the kids are 16 and that’s a whole different universe than age 13.
And, the third grader stood and talked to you for 10 minutes? You realize, that’s quite a lengthy conversation. What all did you have to talk about with an 8 y.o. for 10 whole minutes? My guess is, it was more like 2 minutes.
I just don’t buy this notion that 13 y.o.s are running around waiting to engage in immediate intercourse at the first sign of being alone anyway. Sex addicts aren’t that efficient, and these would be kids with very little actual experience. I am also very suspicious of people who are really needing to insist they’re right about the lack of supervision and urges of these kids, so this will be my last response on this thread.
19. Rita said:
September 27, 2007 @ 3:05 pm
I meant they were 16 by 11th grade, not 12th.
And furthermore, going back to the original article, I’m sure this girl isn’t having sex on school property. I’d just bet that the parents aren’t big on superivison. Now *that* happens. I see that all around me all the time–parents dropping their kids off at the mall or a movie theater unsupervised, or kids hanging out at each other’s houses while the parents are gone. There’s your opportunity. I just totally don’t buy that it happens in the middle schools during school hours.
20. Allena said:
September 27, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
No my dear PRESCOTT, more like I can’t believe that there are more than two undereducated, uptight parents walking around in a daze thinking that their kids are perfectly supervised all day. Get off your computers and get INTO THE SCHOOL people!
and Rita: girls scouts and library books, not that it’s any of your business.
21. Prescott said:
September 27, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
I don’t recall Jessica ever mentioning anything having to do with supervision in schools, but maybe your reading comprehension is better than ours since we’re all so underedumacated.
Ironic that you’re chastising people for being on the computer while, uh, on the computer.
22. Rita said:
September 27, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
Well, when your 13 y.o. is knocked up, I guess we’ll know where it happened, lol. In the library, with your complete consent, since we can’t expect our kids to be supervised anywhere @@
23. Allena said:
September 27, 2007 @ 5:00 pm
“I don’t recall Jessica ever mentioning anything having to do with supervision in schools, but maybe your reading comprehension is better than ours since we’re all so underedumacated.”
well, seeing as how theres a couple letters difference between “Jessica” and “Rita”, I’d say you’re right. Don’t worry, Prescott, I wasn’t agreeing, diagreeing, or even talking to wifey-poo.
Rita, Within the past week, in came out that an 11 year old and 9 year old were having oral sex in the back of a bus in Howell MI…. 1 bus driver, 50 kids…. It is not their responsibility to make sure our kids don’t do stupid shit. It’s ours.
24. Rita said:
September 27, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
Of course it’s our responsibility, and part of our responsibility is making sure that our kids are adequately supervised. I can imagine a million things that had gone wrong in those kids’ upbringings before they were having oral sex on a school bus. There would be a million points of intervention before arriving at that destination. It doesn’t happen just one day.
What do you think happened to the bus driver though? Think he kept his job? Think he got another one real quickly? I’d guess he’s pretty well unemployed right now, because if kids can have oral sex in his care, kids can rape other kids in his care, or do other horrible things, for which we WOULD hold him responsible. When you send your kids off to school, do you do it thinking, “Well, they’re out of my hands, another kid could rape or beat or maim my child and well, I can’t blame the school because they can’t be responsible for all the kids?” I bet not.
25. Allena said:
September 27, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
oops, preston, I see what you’re saying about your better half, never mind. Hookt on fonix werks fer mi.
Rita- so far he does have his job.
Do you think he should be held accountable for what a sneaky 11 year old does 12 seats back while he’s trying to drive? Cause I’m really not sure I do… I dunno. I think the parents should be held accountable for the way they raised (or didn’t raise) a kid who would let a 9 year old give him oral sex.
Besides, aren’t kids beat up often almost every day in schools nationwide? The teachers/lunch aides aren’t held accountable for those injuries, are they? Should they be? In high schools, teachers are told to lock down when theres a fight. Meaning, don’t get involved. Meaning, not their problem…
Actually, I just read more of the story, looks like the bus river had no idea it happened until months later when the tapes were being reviewed….Umm, probably cause he was driving a 2 ton object with 70 kids on it at speeds of up to 55 MPH! Looks like others are having our same argument: Who Is Responsible?
http://www.topix.net/forum/source/wzzm/TI6U965LAETDS56R8
26. Allena said:
September 27, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
My husband (who works in schools) says this is a moot argument because schools have governmental immunity- meaning you can’t sue them, so the only way to hold teachers responsibile for say, sex acts in the stairways and busses, is by firing, and then the union is in the way.