Bravo and amen, I know that the possibility of contracting HPV did nothing to deter me from becoming sexually active in my teens. I don't think much has changed since then except that maybe kids engage in sexual behavior even earlier.
Teenagers are going to engage in risky behavior because that's what teens do. It's our responsibility as informed parents and a progressive society to shepherd these teens into their adulthood, cancer free now that this is a possibility.
CCE, blogging at http://www.madmarriage.com

Reply

Though HPV is the most common STI, most teenagers don't know about it. It's just another obscure disease to get. The only things I could remember from sex ed in middle/high school were gonorrhea and chlamydia, if I could even spell them back then.

I guess I'd also hope that teens today are smart enough to realize that even if they can't get HPV now, they can get other diseases. Maybe not with all the abstinence-only education theyr'e giving them today,,,,do they even teach diseases anymore?

Reply

Ok, I'm conservative. But the thinking behind the "conservative" opinion that it will disinhibit girls, resulting in increased sexual activity is totally off. I dislike conservative extremism (spelling?) This is a life-saving new technology and it's insane to think otherwise. I'm all for it. Just as I'm one of those moms who has my daughter vaccinated, with everything recommended. Do you think since my daughter has vaccines against serious illnesses that she's going to be haphazard about avoiding disease? NO.

Reply

When they invent a vaccine to prevent AIDS, I might start listening to the "they'll have more sex!" argument.

But honestly, I don't think any of us really associates promiscuity with *cancer*.

Reply

I think people are seeing the conservative opposition in a simplistic way.

The problematic message girls will get from the mandated vaccine is not that sex will be a tad bit safer for them. It's that we adults expect them to have sex early and often, so we feel we need to vaccinate them against one of the deadly results of that expected behavior.

The fact is, a very large percentage of girls will not have sex early or be promiscuous if we stick to the traditional ways of communicating our expectations to girls.

Pretty much everyone I know whose mom told them "I know you're gonna do this, so let me get you some birth control / take you to PP" ended up not only losing their virginity, but getting pregnant while still young and unmarried. On the other hand, many whose parents made it clear that they EXPECT their daughters to keep their pants on not only postponed pregnancy, but also kept their virginity for much longer. Personally, I think that's a good thing. Early sex leads to so many problems - HPV is one of the more minor ones. Cervical cancer has an extremely low incidence rate compared to many other risks kids encounter, and since so many women get pap smears annually, the risk of death from that cancer is even smaller. When you subtract out the substantial percentage of those deaths that are associated with causes that this HPV vaccine does not address, the "risk" we say we are fighting is miniscule.

On the other hand, other risks of early / promiscuous sex such as AIDS, tubal pregnancies due to gonorrhea, pregnancies and the complications from that, abortions and the complications from that, herpes (which is still incurable and communicable even with a condom), the side effects of various drugs administered to fight the whole range of STDs, etc., are greater than the risk of cervical cancer. In addition, the lasting effect on a girl's self-esteem when she begins sex too early is not worth the benefit of giving her false security through contraceptives (none of which is 100% safe). It is better to do send them an unequivocal message that early sex is wrong and we expect them to abstain from it.

Taking a preteen for an HPV vaccine is like making her wear a coat, hat, and boots while you're saying, "I don't want you to go outside. I believe you will do the right thing and stay inside." It strains the credibility of one of the parent's most important messages.

So in order to preserve parents' ability to say "I expect you NOT to have sex early and NOT to be promiscuous," lawmakers need to preserve their right to say NO to this vaccine.

I am not opposed to teaching about contraception, because that can be done without implying you expect the child to need to use it before an appropriate age. However, requiring the HPV vaccine is like requiring boys to wear condoms to school. A bit more than mere education.

Reply

Uly,

You say most people don't associate promiscuity with cancer. However, HPV and the cervical cancers caused by it are highly associated with promiscuity at a young age. Not just sex, but early promiscuity. So, promiscuity SHOULD be associated with cancer.

Reply

SKL: My best friend in high school had very strict, very catholic parents. When they caught her with birth control pills, they flushed them down the toilet, and told her that they'd rather that she come home pregnant, than look like she was "Planning on having sex."

She had a baby at 18. Her younger sister had a baby at 17, and her other younger sister had a baby at 14.

They were systematically thrown out of the house when they got pregnant. The middle daughter had the grandparents adopt her son. The youngest daughter moved back in with the grandparents, and just had her second baby, still at home.

The only thing that comes, with certainty, with denying your children birth control, is teen pregnancy.

Please, be careful.

Reply

Sheri, I don't doubt that there are lots of teens who do have sex and get pregnant. However, it is not right to make policies based on the all-but-stated assumption that ALL will do it.

I believe in teaching about birth control by age 10, before there can be any "expectation" that it will be used until marriage. If the kid decides to have sex despite being taught the many reasons not to, she will know how to protect herself, and I will not prevent her from having birth control if she seeks it out for that reason.

Some parents unfortunately don't know how to lovingly discuss these matters with their daughters. We need to do much more than "forbid" the behavior. We need to encourage them to respect themselves so much that they want to wait to have sex. Acting like we expect them to make the wrong decision is not a way to teach them self-respect.

Reply

One in Four, SKL. That is the number of females aged 14-59 infected with HPV, according to JAMA. Futhermore, "the majority of infections occur in people in their early teens and twenties, with incidence declining as people age."

So, given that data, your argument doesn't really hold water. The reality is, girls ARE being infected with this disease. The reality is, they no longer need to be. It really is that simple.

As to the handwringing over the possibility of the vaccination encouraging sexually irresponsible behaviour, I have to wonder, are people out there really going into detail with their NINE YEAR OLDS about this vaccination? With their twelve year olds?

When I take my children for vaccinations, the disease they are being protected from, its method of transmission, its possible deadly effects...these things are immaterial. The simple fact is that they are being protected from viruses that could potentially make them ill. That is all they really need to know--about Menjugate OR about Gardisil.

I think this entire line of argument is simply a tempest in a teapot stirred up by those with a agenda that is meant to punish young women from exercising control over their bodies.

Reply

Sheri: I can't even begin to address your profound idiocy.

Reply

Control over their bodies, Kimberely? This from a mother who refuses to explain what is happening to a child's body at the doctor's office?

By the way, vaccines themselves carry risks. Why not develop vaccines for tooth decay, menstrual cramps, growing pains, earaches, sore throats, colds, laryngitis, etc.

Reply

Sheri,

I would add that your final comment that pregnancy comes with certainty when teens are denied birth control is faulty. There are many, many teens who abstain all together. Birth control access or not, these teens will have 0% chance of pregnancy.

I don't think I have seen a study that proves that kids who use birth control are less likely to get pregnant than those who don't. Because if they are sexually active, they have a good chance of failed or forgotten birth control, while kids who aren't on birth control are, on average, more careful not to risk sexual intercourse. Yes, some kids in both groups get pregnant. But I think a lot of people falsely assume this mainly happens to kids who don't have easy access to contraception. My observations prove otherwise.

Reply

Kimberly,

Yes, one in four has HPV, but only a tiny percentage of these women gets cervical cancer.

If we are going to have laws forcing people to avoid a minor risk of cancer, we'd better ban cigarrettes, red meat, white bread, and so on. While we're at it, we ought to ban sex altogether, since a much higher percentage of women die from other things associated with sex.

As for a young woman's control over her body, I think that's what I'm advocating. Most on this board think I'm an idiot to believe they are capable of such control. If you think teen sex is a good thing, by all means teach your daughter to do it, but I should have the right to encourage my daughter to abstain.

Reply

"If the kid decides to have sex despite being taught the many reasons not to, she will know how to protect herself, and I will not prevent her from having birth control if she seeks it out for that reason."

Oh, thank goodness, I took "It is better to do send them an unequivocal message that early sex is wrong and we expect them to abstain from it." to mean that you wouldn't condone any pre-marital birth control. Kudos to you. :-)

I'm all for both birth control and these inoculations only when they go with teaching the percentage of failure rates. And I agree wholeheartedly that no sex is the ONLY safe sex.

And please, Miss, address my "profound idiocy." That's what comment boards are for. Not one line insults. *talks really slowly so Miss will understand her*

Reply

Oops, I also forgot to mention that I know that by not having sex, you won't get pregnant. Thanks for the reminder, but I'm not THAT profound an idiot. lol

Reply

Oh, and I can give you a number I read tonight - The number of women who will get cervical cancer in the US is 1 in 30.

Reply

1 in 30 sluts getting what's coming to them? Not bad, as far as the law of averages goes.

Reply

You're saying that 100% of American women are sluts now?

Reply

Clearly.

Reply

I'm sorry, it's not very nice of me to get Miss going. You've got to admit, she's not a nice person though.

Reply