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

An important thing to remember is that 13-year-olds have different levels of physical maturity ie puberty starts at different times for different girls.
Certainly boosting girls' self esteem and giving them clear and accurate information about sex, emphasising their right to autonomy and choice, would be the best way forward, but if we are emphasising their right to choose that includes their right to choose to have sex as well as to abstain.
And contraception should be easily accessible to any woman who wants it. Though I do think that good sex education should emphasise a) that PIV is not the best or most important or only type of sex to have and b) that condoms are a good idea if you are going to do PIV, the pill has the other benefit of regulating painful or heavy periods and as a back up to the use of a condom.

I have some reservations - yet again, 100% of responsibility for contraception is put on young women, instead of being shared with young men. I do feel somewhat concerned about pumping 13 year olds full of hormones,, although of course I do accept that there are other reasons why young women go on the pill, and how beneficial it can be for treating horrible periods, acne etc. On balance I think this plan is a good one. I can well imagine 13 year olds feeling that they couldn't go to their GP for all sorts of reasons, ditto discussing it with their parents. I would rather they didn't have to face the possibility of an unwanted pregnancy, although of course they need a way of protecting against STIs too.

I find the arguments about plans like this making young people 'promiscuous' to be rooted in a deep belief that 'sex is dirty' and young innocent minds must be protected from it for as long as possible. Which says a lot more about the adults who hold these views than the youngsters themselves IMHO

13 is too young to be sexually active, there is no doubt in my mind about that. However, the reality is that some girls are sexually active at 13, therefore why not?
It is not because it can be bought over the counter that it will encourage them to have sex earlier. I am questioning whether it will be an effective way of not getting young girls pregnant though, because you have to remember to take it every day at the same moment. I am not sure what else can be used. Maybe the implant?
More open education about sex would be a good thing rather than the whole "let's not talk about it too much in schools in case we give them ideas..."

At 13 my friends and I all went to the local Brook clinic and went on the pill, none of us were sexually active at the time but most of us were considering it. I lost my virginity at 14, my friends lost theirs between 13 and 18.

Have we any pharmacists on here? I'd like to hear from one. Whenever I've had a pill check, they take my weight and blood pressure. Can a pharmacist do this and then advise the teen if they should see a doctor if something is not quite right?

I'm not liking the almost but not quite 'bashing' of the suitability of pharmacists for the job so it would be good to hear their side.

I don't think a teenage girl will be willing to see a school nurse to get the pill tbh, and of course "if they are mature enough to be having sex, they should be mature enough to visit the gp" I agree with in principle, but it doesn't quite work that way!

Not a pharmacist but used to work in a pharmacy. I was qualified to take blood pressure and we had a set of scales. You can already get the MAP from some pharmacies. I think 13 year olds should be able to go on the pill if they want to but it needs to go in the medical records and be properly monitored because of side effects etc.

''Have we any pharmacists on here? I'd like to hear from one. Whenever I've had a pill check, they take my weight and blood pressure. Can a pharmacist do this and then advise the teen if they should see a doctor if something is not quite right?''

I agree with this poster. I always have to go every 3 months for my pill/HRT and have to get bp taken. It annoys the heck out of me because my bp has never ever been a problem and I've been on this medication for a couple of years. Still it's better that they can keep an eye on things. I would be much happier nipping to the pharmacist to get my bp checked than my nurse who grills me to the nth degree about my lifestyle and they inevitably ask why I am on HRT at a young age. None of your business madam!

I do think young girls should have more options about precautions. I knew a girl who got pregnant at 13 and had her baby days before her 14th birthday. I would worry however that some girls would do it for the status of it. 'Look at me, I'm on the pill!' kind of thing.

needs to go in the medical records and be properly monitored because of side effects etc.

Surely though, you'd know from a visit if blood pressure was elevated above an acceptable level, or weight was a problem, and could refuse a prescription until the teen had been to their GP?

It is too young and as Sirzy says, will this be on their medical records? As far as I am aware, pharmacists don't have access to patient's medical records so they have no idea of the history of that patient and the GP has no idea that the child is on the pill.

It doesn't prevent STIs and to be honest it sends out a very clear message that girls and girls alone are responsible for their own contraception whereas boys can just fuck who they like without a care in the world.

The pill gave me severe depression, something that wasn't mentioned as a side effect when it was prescribed. Will the pharmacists go through all the side effects with the children? Will they tell them that if you have sickness and diarrhoea that you need to take extra precautions?

Why don't they just lower the legal age to 13? After all, they seem to be wanting to encourage young girls to be able to get contraception without their parents or GPs knowledge so why not go that step further eh? Or why don't they, and this is just a thought, have a huge review of sex education in schools because if young girls are still getting pregnant then obviously something is not working and throwing the pill at them does not solve the problem, it merely tackles the side effects.

Young girls of 13 should not be having sex and I would wonder at their maturity to give their consent. You have to take into account abuse and coercion and you also have to look at WHY they feel the need to have sex at such a young age. You can't just say, "well we know that these children are having sex, we don't want them to breed so we'll just give them the pill" without looking at the wider issue.

As usual, our society just seems to want to bury its head in the sand as to what is really happening and just hopes that by tackling the side issues the problem will go away.

I started the pill when I started having sex at 14. I'm sure it is better being on the pill and doing it rather than not and having children as children.

I would like to hear a better solution.

It only prevents pregnancy- not STDs. The fear of getting pregnant can be a tool for girls in not having sex. Like the school implant issue a few weeks back, I don't see this as a step forward in the empowerment of women.

LST why did you feel you were ready or needed to have sex at the age of 14?

And why didn't you consider asking the boy if he would wear a condom?

Yonwhale. One blood pressure reading doesn't really provide an accurate view of someone's health though. Would the pharmacist know if the child had other issues which meant the pill or a certain type of pill wouldn't be effective? What records would be kept of who was prescribed what?

I think pharmasists do a great job but they aren't drs and shouldn't be prescribing drugs.

Some 13 year olds have willing sex with other 13 year olds. Allowing access to contraception doesn't encourage sex, or sexual predators, it makes it safer.

I don't think allowing pill access sends any messages about women being solely responsible - condoms have been handed out freely during sex talks for YEARS.

The points about the side effects are quite interesting; I had forgotten that some pills can send people boolaa. That is something that would have to be discussed really. Maybe as part of the sex education programme?

One blood pressure reading doesn't really provide an accurate view of someone's health though

I do understand what you're saying, but I only have one reading once a year for my pill check, yet that is taken an an accurate overview.

Not such a great idea. My teenagers can barely remember to put their bedroom lights off, do homework, etc., let alone remember to take a pill regularly. The pill won't protect them from STD's. If peer group boys hear a girl is on the pill they may consider her 'open for business' (a phrase I have seen used on facebook when a girl reached 16). It removes one more reason for a girl to feel that she can say no. We should be helping young people understand that they need to reach physical and emotional maturity before beginning a sexual relationship.

YonWhaleFish - yes some do, but does it really make sex safer? In that it will prevent pregnancies but not STIs? And what message does it give to the young girl? That she alone is responsible for preventing pregnancy? Why not give out free condoms at the pharmacy too then? Surely condoms would be a better idea as they not only prevent pregnancy but stop STIs too.

Or, if you say that we should just accept that young children are having sex at 13 then would you be willing to lower the legal age limit to 13?

Surely a teen would only be seeking the pill independently of her parents if she were already planning to have sex.

What we need is good Sexual Health Clinics in all areas.

My city is very good at providing this service. They do health checks when prescribing and give advice and free condoms, even when giving the pill etc.

If the handing out of the pill isn't monitored then it could be more easily gotten than it is now, for very young girls (in abuse and other illegal cases).

Just to add we should not be handing out contraceptives without giving sexual health advice, which clinics do, because we have a duty of care to 13 year olds.

I don't like the assumption that all under 16s who are having sex are doing so because they are coerced. It is possible for 13, 14 and 15 year olds to be in fairly healthy and stable relationships (with other 13, 14 and 15 year olds) and want to have sex. Remember that for some of the young women you are discussing, they may have begun puberty 3-4 years earlier.

What contraception ensures is that they do not end up linked to the young man who they have sex with at 13, 14 or 15 for the rest of their lives, and responsible to bringing up another child before they have entered adulthood themselves. I would say this is more important the younger you start having sex, but for most poeple is remains important until well into their 20s.

I do think that monitoring/recording of blood pressure etc and discussion of potential side effects (including depression) are important with hormonal medication. Unless I am missing something, this isn't a service which most pharmacies can offer. Women should be encouraged to keep returning to the same clinic at least (even if this is just through the "soft" measure that you need to fill in forms to register) so that a record of their medication and reactions to it can be kept.

But yon the gp can access your whole medical history so has more than what you say and a bp reading to hand