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

The fear of getting pregnant was pretty much the only factor in my not being sexually active- small village GP family friend etc. I said no for the sole reason just because I didn't want to get pregnant.
Now I a) don't want my underage daughters having sex and b) not without a condom.

Therhubarb I think condoms have been pushed far more than the pill previous to this, and there were no claims of contraceptive responsibility belonging solely to boys. As far as I'm aware, since my young days you've been able to get free condoms by walking into a family planning centre and just asking for them.

Condoms are equally as important, indeed, why not give them away free with the pill? I agree completely.

Of course it makes sex safer as it reduces the pregnancy risk. If you're being pedantic, no, it doesn't prevent STI's obviously.

I don't think this discussion has anything to do with the legal age of consent.

I know underage teenagers will have sex with one another, it doesn't mean I think they are ready for it. Because I know it happens, I'd rather see them able to access all the contraceptive support they need, in a way they will use.

Agree with MrsHoarder Thu 26-Apr-12 11:09:11

I don't think the self esteem and saying no argument holds water. Lots of teenagers have raging hormones and really want to have sex.

I know a lot of women with high self esteem who had sex very young. And some who did who felt manipulated. So it's not a one size fits all issue.

Being pregnant at 13 is too young Im really on the fence about this , I do think 13 is far to young to be having sex children and they are children should learn their bodies/minds are not ready at 13 ,but on the other hand i wouldnt wish a pregnnacy on any 13 yr old , I hate the idea that this can be presribed and given out without parental consent ,

I would like to know the procedure that happens at the pharmacy, and what questions are asked and how they judge who to give it to and who not. It's very interesting.

I think we need to stop thinking of teenage sex as a harmless bit of fun.

Maybe the sex itself is, but with it comes more adult responsibilities that a 13, 14, 15 year old may not be able to handle, such as unwanted pregnancy, STDs, and emotional abuse, Also public humiliation if a school girl is branded a "slag" (hideous term) by her peers, or sexual texts or photographs are bandied about.

You don't have to have sex, just because you really want it.

But I don't think men who rape children are particularly bothered about whether those children become pregnant or not MyNameIsntFuckingWarren.
be able to protect themselves from some of the consequences.

I also think that 13yo girls who are having sex are probably not often in the position of insisting that their "partner" uses a condom. I suspect it would be the pill or nothing.

I think that the consequences of being raped as a child are bad enough without having to experience an unwanted pregnancy as well.

Experiences of some posters on here notwithstanding, my experience at school was that a lot of the girls who were having sex at that age were under considerable pressure to do so from their (often much older) boyfriends. I am sure that at the time not many of them would consider herself to have been coerced/groomed/raped. I am not so sure that they would have felt the same five, ten years later. Many of them were already extremely damaged kids at that age, it was hand-in-hand with other dangerous / illegal behaviour. Yes we should be addressing this kind of situation and I think schools in particular should be doing a lot more to empower girls and young women so that they are less vulnerable to those kinds of shitty "relationships". I vividly remember overhearing a teacher being told in class by one of my schoolmates that she was having regular sex with her twentysomething boyfriend - girl was 13 at the time - and the teacher just looked embarrassed and laughed it off. IMO (then and now) that should have been a SS / police referral.

I would assume it is much easier to walk away from those "relationships" and empower yourself as a young adult when you are not tied to your rapist by having had a child by them. I would assume that in situation like that the pressure on mothers to "normalise" the behaviour of their child's father would be even worse than in other abusive relationships.

I guess I feel that the short-term minimizing of risky behaviors (eg providing contraception) should not be seen to condone (or cause) those behaviors. Or to replace the real work that should be done on addressing the issues that lead to 13yo children having sex in the first place. And I say children because if my sons started having sex (with anyone, of any age) at 13 I would be devastated. I am sure that there are some 13yos having sex with other 13yos in which case the issue of rape etc becomes a very murky issue - but the fact remains that although I don't think it is okay for children that age to be having sex, full stop, I do feel that they should be able to protect themselves from some of the consequences.

YEP onehandflappying couldnt agree more just because they can doesnt mean they should and its ok ,

You don't have to have sex, just because you really want it.

Of course not. But the support should be accessible if they choose to go ahead. The point is that you can't control them. You can love them, and explain to them, and talk to them about it all, but it still might not stop them. That's why I think the support should be there.

I have an almost 13 year old dd who can barely speak to a real life boy let alone anything else (all girls school). The thought of her having sex at such an early age makes me feel very sad. However Victoria Gillick was around in my day and the point at which the law changed so young girls couldn't get the pill without their parents being informed was a mess. Girls were getting pregnant that could have prevented it.

My feeling is make it available, but hope like mad that home will win through and your 13 year old won't be having sex. As far as I'm concerned the one thing worse than a sexually active 13 year old is a pregnant one.

I have a 13 year old girl and I can't imagine her wanting to have sex, she is very mature for her age but much more into sport than boys (thankfully) Unlike her older sister who was a menace by 13/14 and I had to keep a close eye on

TBH it shocked me somewhat to find out that until 1928 you could marry at 12 if you where a girl in England and Wales That is within living memory it was legal for girls to have sex at 12 and marry for boys 14 years old.

YANBU. 13 is too young. They should be allowed to have a childhood, not be pressured into having sex.

If a girl is mature at that age surely she is mature enough to know the law and therefore mature enough to WAIT?

If a girl feels she cannot wait 3 years to start having sex then she is too immature to be having sex IMO.

I just don't see it as very supportive. Yes it will stop some girls getting pregnant, but not stop STDs. Some girls will take the pill and still become pregnant, some will have the only excuse for not having sex taken away from them.

I guess I feel that the short-term minimizing of risky behaviors (eg providing contraception) should not be seen to condone (or cause) those behaviors. Or to replace the real work that should be done on addressing the issues that lead to 13yo children having sex in the first place.---I don't think it is okay for children that age to be having sex, full stop, I do feel that they should be able to protect themselves from some of the consequences.

I agree with this.

If a girl feels she cannot wait 3 years to start having sex then she is too immature to be having sex IMO.

That's all well and good, but it won't stop her.

I don't think it's too young.

But I fully agree with those who say it should be monitored. I hate the way the pill is handed out like candy to everyone without the action mechanism being properly explained (I've spoken to grown adults with multiple children who had no clue how it worked, the things that interfered with it, what to do if you forget etc.etc.) and without people being properly checked for side effects. Liver function, kidney function, DVT risk, history of cancer in the family and so on should be checked, for teenagers and adults alike, at least during the first 3-6 months. The pill is very, very useful for the vast majority of people who take it, but it's serious medication and should be treated as such.

Condoms and STIs are whole other story.

the one thing worse than a sexually active 13 year old is a pregnant one or one infertile through chlamydia, or with the only excuse she feels empowered enough to use taken away from her.

It shouldn't be given out otc.

Why though? Many 13 years are too embarrassed to see their GPs, and will still have sex, no matter what is said by adults.

Yourwhalefish, it is up to the parent to stop her. As a parent you know how mature your child is. Parent pressure and parent will counts when it comes to protecting our children.

Again yon because of the risks involved it needs to be properly monitored and on someone's medical records.