10 year olds on contraceptives, was on this morning, could it ever be ok?

[ChoochiWoo]

www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/11376747/How-can-it-be-right-to-give-10-year-old-girls-contraceptive-impants.html

Damn link *hangs head in despair

Did you mean this article?

Was it because of period problems or for protection?

It's really sad, my DD is going to be 3 soon and I can't bear the thought of her NEEDING contraception so young. This current generation of kids aren't being kids and it's just plain depressing.

Giles for protection

My dd (just turned 10) has dreadful periods and as she has developmental delay it is strongly recommended for her to go on the Pill. I am very hesitant about this as I am concerned about a growing child taking hormones, and the long term effects.

A ten year old taking it for contraceptive purposes is very sad indeed.

sheesh.

well clearly there's no right answer fir this.

like it or not underage children will have sex. with or without contraception.

I do not envy drs having to make these decisions at all. pregancy could be seriously problematic or even fatal at such a young age. how the hell do you weigh that up with age appropriateness and signs of abuse etc.

god how utterly depressing :(

I have an 8 yr old. She still plays with teddies.... The idea kids 2 years older are having sex is frightening.

OK hang on, it says these were exceptional cases involving safeguarding and health reasons.
I don't think a 10 year old popped off to the docs for the implant so she could have sex with her boyfriend.

I wondered that too Giles, apparently it is for contraception

I don't even understand how it could be legal. Isn't it tantermount to accepting that the abuse will take place and just trying to minimise the consequences rather than, you know, protecting the child?

I also have issues with referring to sexual activity in children so young as 'underage sex' - it's rape (and very different to two 15 year olds engaging in sexual activity).

I just read the article.

Our paediatrician said that in children with severe developmental delay/LD's?ASD the general advice is that periods should be either stopped or kept to a minimum in order to reduce potential stress, which although I am still hesitant about, I can understand.

However I don't get the safeguarding thing? Would this be to prevent a pregnancy in a child who is potentially being sexually abused?

There's no mention of external agencies being called on the cases where the child has been as young as 10.

If the child is absconding from care or it's feared she might, then contraception as a backup to protecting her from someone isn't a bad idea. Very sad if that's the case, but the same 10-year-old getting pregnant would be much worse (and huge hormonal effects)

I'm also assuming that drs have to consider the importance of that child having somewhere and someone to go to where they can trust people and be safe and possibly being that person despite all other ethical issues.

What are confidentiality rules with regards to children?

I think if a doctor suspects sexual abuse/ rape is taking place, it's sensible to protect the child first and foremost, and then seek help.
I could be wrong but my understanding is that reporting suspected child abuse, and then that being investigated and proved, and the child being removed from the situation doesn't happen over night. I understand a doctor giving immediate protection, to then be followed up. It would be awful if a girl so young got pregnant in the time it took to sort it out.

If there is enough evidence to suggest that a child is in danger of rape to require an implant, there is enough reason for immediate care proceedings. It would be dreadful if a child was sent home to be raped regardless of pregnancy risk.

Sexual activity with a girl under 13 is rape (and often over depending on age of the parter). It's not a sad lifestyle choice where adults get to shrug their shoulders and say 'well, what can you do?' Rotherham thinking.

Huh? If a girl of 10 is having sex then surely she is being abused and social services need to get in there and get her the hell out of that situation, not give her an implant? It's not 'under age sex' FFS.

The article gives only partial figures: "Implants were given to 56 girls aged 12 or younger, with 281 cases involving girls of 13, the figures show.
More than 3,000 cases involved girls of 14, with 6,000 implants given to 15-year-olds, disclosures from 61 of 160 NHS trusts show."

And also specifically mentions LDs, and one Health Authority is quoted as saying they are only provided after close consultation including with the Safeguarding Team.

Given the small numbers it could be (and I really hope it is) only the sort of cases that NotCitrus mentions, or the difficulties of maintaining 24/7 supervision in residential homes (for if the boy also has LDs, there may be no hope of a properly used condom and you really can't vasectomise at that age).

It's possible she may well be out if the situation in the sense of removed from abusive family or care givers however she is still running away from home or wherever and participating in the learned behaviour having bunked off school or sneaking out of bedroom.windows.

There's no detail in what actually happened.

Giles I agree this happens but the answer isn't the pill. A secure theraputic placement (not a secure unit) would be one possible answer because a little girl is vulnerable and can't keep herself safe.

And while they find a place and she undergoes therapy?

you can't lock doors and windows it's a fire hazard.

what if there are additional needs making her hard to place.

If it's not immediate she's in danger.

I'm assuming maybe wrongly I don't know, that these things can take time. and it's that time that there would be the problem

It is entirely possible to create a safe and secure environment (with window locks if needs be). But it's expensive and no-one wants to pay - hence the lack of such placements and the time it takes to find one.

It shouldn't be that way. Children in this situation are in danger of so much more than pregnancy - repeated rape, sexual abuse, STDs, drink, drugs, violence etc. Of course preventing pregnancy is good but at the same time it is a sticking plaster tocover a huge wound. By the time you identify a 10 year old needs an implant you should already have other resources open to you to mean she doesn't.

I think it should be legal - a 10 year old cannot be allowed to get pregnant once she has gone to a medical professional to ask for contraception.

However, there should be a legal obligation to investigate the hell out of this, prosecute the guilty parties (parents probably!) and help the children involved in everyway possible.

I would agree with that

Would a DR give the implant in the highly unusual event that a 10 year old has started her periods and they are very very heavy and disruptive, or making her ill, or causing her mental distress?
I've not had the implant but I think it stops your periods? The child would not even have to know that it was a method of contraception, they would just be told 'this will make the bleeding stop'.