Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Calfornia & Sex-Ed

The California Catholic Daily, an on-line publication, has this revealing article on the consequences of our sex-ed public school policy :

How does Planned Parenthood explain this?
Rate of sexually-transmitted diseases soars among young Californians

A study published last month in the Californian Journal of Health Promotion reports that in 2005 there were 1.1 million new cases of sexually-transmitted infections among young people in California. The 1.1 million figure is ten times higher than previously believed, and it means that in the 15-24 age group, diseases such as chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, HPV and HIV now infect almost one out of every four young Californians. Is this because of a lack of sex-ed in the public schools? Apparently not. According to Chris Weinkopf, editorial-page editor of the Los Angeles Daily News, the California Department of Education reports that "96 percent of California school districts provide comprehensive sexual health education" and all California schools have been required to teach HIV/AIDS prevention education since 1992. Can we blame the abstinence-only programs promoted by the Bush administration? Not in California.

Weinkopf notes that state law prohibits 'abstinence-only' education in the public schools. In addition, California may be the only state in the country that has refused to accept millions of federal dollars for abstinence education. "This [soaring rate of sexually-transmitted infections] is no surprise," said Linda Klepacki, sexual health analyst for Focus on the Family Action in an online press release. "California has insisted on teaching contraceptive-based sex education in their schools all along. They expect teens to be sexually active. They don’t raise the health standard to abstinence…

It's clear California supports sexually active teens, and STI rates will naturally explode with these policies." Another factor in the out-of-control disease rates among California children and young adults may be the introduction of the “morning-after” pill. According to testimony offered to the FDA in 2004, sexually-transmitted infections soared in the British Isles when “Plan B” (the morning-after pill) was made available without prescription in 2000. Ignoring the warning signals from the UK, California subsequently became one of the first states to permit the sale of Plan B over-the-counter without an age limit. (Compiled testimony of Wendy Wright, Carole Denner, and Jill Stanek, "The Morning-After Pill: An Ill Wind This Way Blows.")

The new study on sexually-transmitted infections among young people in California was completed by the Center for Research on Adolescent Health and Development at the Public Health Institute in Oakland. Study author Dr. Petra Jerman told Medical News Today that the statistics revealed an epidemic of which, like an iceberg, only a small part is visible. The authors acknowledged that their figures are underestimated because of incomplete screening of sexually active young people, and failure to confirm the effectiveness of treatment through follow-up testing. Ed Thomas of OneNewsNow.com added another dimension to this distressing picture by reporting that a striking increase in suicide rates among people ages 10 to 24 has been confirmed by recently released statistics from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control .

At the same time, says Thomas, UCLA psychiatrist Dr. Miriam Grossman is convinced that promiscuity is the root cause of much depression. Dr. Grossman argues that the promiscuity-depression-suicide link is being ignored by doctors who fail to caution students against the documented self-destructive dangers rampant in the university’s sexual “hook-up” culture.

2 comments:

Karin said...

This really makes me sick!
How can people allow this to happen to our young people??

Anonymous said...

I am wee bit disheartened to find this blog. Another news story referenced this blogsite and I navigated to it. It strikes me as very sad that a blogger who identifies himself as "85 years *young*"does not offer more hopeful messages. In reading through these postings, I felt very sorry for this man, *presumably*, who served in seemingly prestigious roles in the Church. I would expect more from someone who had a leadership role, seems to have a real affinity for working with young people, and has a cat which commands some tenderness. If the blogger could restructure his musings to be more hopeful, the future would not be so bleak and dismal. I guess also I am feeling a little befuddled as to why he is lamenting and lambasting this generation. As a chronologically young person, I am wondering if this older/younger man does not realize that it was he that created the situation we are in. In the end, forgo bitterness, vitriole, and sarcasm. Make the last years of life imbued with more hope for you and all of us. Oremus pro invicem!