To think 13 is too young to go on the pill

[toni76]

A report says girls as young as 13 should get the pill without a prescription. I just think 13 is sooo young (have two little girls). AIBU to think there must be a better way to stop 13 year olds getting pregnant?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17847069

Yellowhouse although it sounds idealistic, I agree with you.
I have 2 boys and I would be genuinely upset if I discovered they were sexually active at 13.

Horses 4 courses - most young girls think boys their age are sooo babyish but the danger comes from older boys which is worrying.
Fact: girls are growing and maturing sexually far younger these days - presumably because of excess nutrition - so we really cannot make a direct comparison with when we were their age.
My DD 13 has ust woken up to the opposite sex but horses still trump everything. Plus mine are so hygiene obsessed that they will not fall into anything easily - try the Radio 4 item on kissing this week on health check on the iplayer.

I went on the pill at 14 as I thought it was a grown up and cool thing to do, I didn't even have a boyfriend and my mum wasn't informed. A friend and I went to the family planning clinic after they visited our school and had to have an interview with a nurse then were given the pill......

I would be very upset if my daughter felt she couldn't talk to me about having sex but I would also be very against her having sex at the age of 13. I think growing up in a household where my parents were fairly liberal but sex was never discussed has made me very open about sex but also quite over protective.

Kids don't get pregnant in other European countries where there are explicit and comprehensive programmes of sex ed. Low pregnancy and low STD ensue, so the Puritan policy of abstinence is totally unrealistic: it does not work (see US stats for under-age pregnancy, where every solution to teen sex except abstinence is swept under the Puritan carpet)

My reservations with giving the pill to 13 yo are strangely not to stop them having sex: but thinking about contraception / disease protection in a more realistic way.

1 what if they have a bad reaction to the pill / other hormonal contraception?

2 can they be trusted to take a pill every day?
3 The pill doesn't protect against STDs and HIV.

So we need to stay real: have very comprehensive sex ed, acknowledge that teens are going to have sex: and deal with the disease avoidance and minimise pregnancy incidence.

This is not about training teens to say NO, but rather training them to say HOW can I protect myself. Protection training includes alcohol consumption awareness.

I think it is too young and I think it gives girls the wrong attitude and actually dimishes their self confidence. I know it is obviously a growing problem which needs to be tackled, but if I were to tell a 13 year old to go on the pill what does that tell the 13 year old I think of her. In my book it tells her that I expect her to have sex at this age and it is ok. It tells her about her sense of worth and that the boys expectations to have sex with her are fine.

I also think it is wrong when the pill carries the risks it does.
DVT may not be common in young people but I had one when I was 29 a couple of years ago. This is a serious consideration especially when new information is being produced about different associated illnesses that can start in puberty such as APS (antiphospholid syndrome ect)

What would happen in a case where young girls are groomed, as in the news recently. The 'well it's ok in our country' . Might a defence for these people be 'well they are on the pill so are expecting to have sex'?
The whole thing needs thinking through.

As pointed out in the link I posted earlier, there is a power imbalance in Britain that does not seem to exist elsewhere in Europe, that militates against communication on the subject of contraception between young teens who are having sex. The idea that this can be talked about and should be talked about between the parties involved is something that doesn't seem to have occurred to sex educators. It is not a question of teaching girls to say no in other European countries. It very much is in the US and to a large extent that is the assumption in Britain. The result is high rates of teen pregnancy.

I think my main concern with this is whether the girls are still given a proper medical check up and whether family medical history is discussed etc to avoid any contraindications. Hormonal contraceptives are serious stuff. While I agree with wider/easier access the potential effects on the body have to be considered.

Ok, so like I said earlier pharmacy services are complicated.

There are three levels -

Essential services- these are provided by every pharmacy and include things like selling medicines, giving advice, dispensing, governance.

Advanced services - these are commissioned nationally and can be provided by every pharmacy subject to accreditation; on the whole they are aimed at supporting patients with long term conditions to take their medicines correctly.

And finally enhanced services
These are commissioned and paid for locally by PCTs and councils to meet local needs and include things like sexual health services, drug services and care at the chemist.
Because they are commissioned locally there is a huge variation in what is available and where.

The morning after pill and the pill services are both part of the last group.

The morning after pill is available free of charge in many areas to young people aged 14 and over from pharmacies (advertising is poor in general) and has been for many years. The service is usually in areas of high teenage pregnancy, high termination rates and deprivation. It aims to increase accessibility (many pharmacies have extended opening hours) and choice.

Of course pharmacies can sell and supply the morning after pill to adults with just a short consultation, but this is expensive and out of the price range of many young people.

The Pill Service is the progression from the Morning after pill service.

For both of these pharmacists will undergo extensive additional training - there will be local variation, but I imagine as a minimum-

Safeguarding children, sexual health, contraception and emergency contraception by distance learning (around 25 hours)

Then

Probably two evening workshops

And

One event specific to the service and how to run it. This will include Frasier and Gillick competencies and how to assess if a young person is capable of making decisions about their own health and also how to identify red flags that need to be referred.

Young people will have a consolation in a private room to discuss their individual situation and general health in detail (this is not an over the counter sale in the way many of you seem to be interpreting it).

Both services will include STI advice, probably chlamydia screening (if in the target age groups) and condoms.

Thank you for the clarification.

I have a question about this:
'The Pill Service is the progression from the Morning after pill service.'

Does this mean you can only get the pill after getting on the books for the morning after pill? (i.e. can you get the pill before you have become a morning after pill patient?)

Thank you for explaining that, That's enough. It seems that there will be a good support system in place and health checks regularly. So we are left with the social and moral issues.

I'd love to know about that ivana, my DH said he'd go on it if there ever is one!

allboxedin nobody is telling any 13 year olds to go on the pill...it's simply a service to make the pill accessible to younger girls who might want to go on it.

Really appreciating your input thatsenough!

"This is a very good way to allow men to rape children without any fear of nasty little consequences like pregnancy. "

What a ridiculous comment - since when did any rapist or child abuser worry (or know!) about whether the girl is on the pill or not?

The basic problem with this country is people want to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that 13 year olds can't possibly be willingly having sex. Countries like the Netherlands which have very good sex education from a young age and widely available contraception having the lowest teenage pregnancy rates.

I do accept that 13 year olds may well not be trusted to take the pill, so perhaps implants are a better option. Also EDUCATION is key, both to try to stop kids wanting to have sex so young, and also to make sure they know about the other risks of sex - any girl going on the pill should also be given condoms and reminded that they should be used to protect against disease.

People who think telling kids sex is wrong is going to help the situation are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Totally agree with you totallypearshaped. Nice to see some sane people on here.

myname that is so in legal terms, but there are many "consenting" teens having sex, illegally.

Shouting that it's wrong and denying access to contraception doesn't help, does it?

I also think it's very naive of posters to think their children couldn't possibly grow up and end up having underage sex.

std.about.com/od/stdsspecificcommunities/f/transformfaqcer.htm

This is about the higher risk to infections faced by teenage girls. Basically their cervix hasn't developed its full protective wall yet. Moreover Chlamydia isn't as easy to cure as we are all led to believe. And surprise, surprise - HVP aren't stopped by condoms. Best to persuade your teenage daughter to wait if she wants to live happily ever after - and have babies to boot.

Also EDUCATION is key

I think it's way more complex than that. It's advertising, TV, films, magazines....so much. Children receive that every is having sex, all the time, and that's a desirable thing to be doing for your status. A bit more education isn't going to do much to change that IMO. The media and entertainment is too powerful.

Sorry mathsanxiety I wasn't clear there.

What I meant was that pharmacists have been providing the morning after pill safely for some time to young people and are comfortable with doing this - for us, as a profession more clinical services is the natural progression and A Pill Service is one of these.

There will be variation around criteria across the country and a Morning After pill request may trigger a discussion about regular contraception, but I don't think it will ever be a necessary if that makes sense.

I also imagine that the minimum age will vary across areas too.

As for the male pill I have no info - sorry.

i think 13 is to young in most cases to be on the pill. im fairly sure that at 13, the majority of girls havent completed puberty, and im just not sure that giving them hormones before its properly sorted out wont have an effect on that. Fine if a girl had her periods at nine, at 13 she will be well past puberty, but if she has only had one period, or none, then im not sure that the contraceptive pill is the best thing from her from a medical point of view.

13 and above is the gillick competence thing i believe. so a young person who presents with a clear idea of what s/he wants and shows a clear understanding of consequences, shouldnt be denied treatment just because s/he hasnt reached the completely non magical age of 16.

No one has mentioned AIDS! A sexual health worker I know once depressing said that he had told two teenagers that afternoon that they were HIV positive. They knew nothing about HIV and thought it could be treated with a 5 day course of antibiotics. They were hetrosexual and one was a girl!

For goodness sake, tell your daughters not to have sex until they are older, at least 16 preferably 18. Then teach them to have safe sex and not to have sex with anything that moves. Set them an example and give this country back some morals! Why should my daughter be pressured into having sex because you lot are all too pathetic to teach your daughters right from wrong!

I had an 'urge' to drive cars when I was 15.......

They can't legally drive until they are 17, you don't shrug your shoulders and throw them the car keys "because they are going to do it anyway!"

ohanotherone please read through the whole thread properly. Nobody has that "shrug the shoulders" attitude. Many of us think education is key, and condoms are vital, and that ideally it shouldn't happen.

Reality is that it does.

Obviously I agree with all those things but I do not agree with people saying that actually telling children that they shouldn't have sex is idealistic. My mum told me about STD's and pregnancy and emotional issues and basically that I shouldn't have sex because it's not a good idea until you are older and shock horror I bloody well listened to her!