Should parents put their dating teenage daughters on birth control?

[RMGuy]

At our house we teach abstinence as the policy. However, we also encourage open and honest dialoge. If our daughter (and I have one in that age range) came to us and told us she and her bf had decided to have sex...(she has told us lots of stuff, so I believe she would bring this to us), then we would talk through why they made that decision, why we think it is not a good decision etc. But if she was committed to her course of action, then we would indeed make sure that she had access to birth control.

-RM

Edited February 23, 2012 by RMGuy

[Guest]

I think that if a teen is determined and going to have sex, there isn't a thing parents can do about. So they should at least be responsible about it and avoid the consequences inflicted on the individual, the unborn child and society in general of a teen pregnancy.

Well, that's just the thing. I don't believe in avoiding consequences. Consequences is part and parcel of every decision.

[Backroads]

In a perfect world (ok not perfect because it wouldn't be an issue in a perfect world lol) the teen would take the responsibility. Odds are they are not doing things openly and therefore the parent can't supply it.... unless the parent is going to supply it on the assumption that their child is going to go behind their back. Doesn't show much confidence in the child or your parenting skills, that never goes well.

However, after the parents know about the actions of the child then I think they should step up and supply it.

What if the kid was already taking care of the protection as part of these activities behind the parents' back? Suppose kid is buying condoms or already obtained a bc prescription (doable in many states without needing parent's knowledge)? When parent finds out, should he/she take over? Or is there anything wrong with parents, after finding out child's indiscretions, on informing them they expect them to provide financially for at least some of the protection?

I'm not criticizing your answer, just thinking further.

[RMGuy]

Well, that's just the thing. I don't believe in avoiding consequences. Consequences is part and parcel of every decision.

So if you have children and they decide to have sex (with or without your knowledge) then you have preferred to have the consequence of grand children/std's as opposed to being the one to sign them up for birth control. Fair enough.

-RM

[pam]

Depends on the girl, but for mine- absolutely not. No reason to.

If parents suspect their daughter is sleeping around, putting her on the pill is sending a message loud and clear that "It's OK with us."

I kind of have to disagree with this. We can teach our daughters all about premarital sex and the dangers that can come about because of it. We can teach them correct principles. But we all know there are some that will still go against those same principles we have attempted to instill in them.

But as MOE said, I'd rather minimize the damage that can be done. We aren't just talking about the life of the girl, we are also talking about any children that might come about because of it.

[Backroads]

So if you have children and they decide to have sex (with or without your knowledge) then you have preferred to have the consequence of grand children/std's as opposed to being the one to sign them up for birth control. Fair enough.

-RM

Shouldn't the kids have been aware of the wise decision of protection and therefore informed a responsible adult party of their need? It's not like teenagers don't have access these days to basic knowledge of consequences and a vague idea of how to protect themselves.

If the kids didn't want pregnancy or STDs, they would have stepped up earlier.

[Guest]

At our hose we teach abstinence as the policy. However, we also encourage open and honest dialoge. If our daughter (and I have one in that age range) came to us and told us she and her bf had decided to have sex...(she has told us lots of stuff, so I believe she would bring this to us), then we would talk through why they made that decision, why we think it is not a good decision etc. But if she was committed to her course of action, then we would indeed make sure that she had access to birth control.

-RM

I'm of a different mindset. Our house teaches abstinence as the policy. If my children decide to not follow that policy (and yes, we have very open dialogue in our house), then it's up to them to deal with each and every consequence including birth control. They're 8 and 10 right now and they already know quite a bit about the consequences. They know where my husband and I stand on the matter. We will stand firm on our principles but be there to hold their hand while they suffer the consequences if it comes to that. And like Gwen said - this is not just pregnancy, etc. It includes the emotional and spiritual consequences first and foremost. Hate the sin, love the sinner.

It's the same as drugs, alcohol, cigarettes... They know the consequences. They deal with it themselves. I'll even go so far as to kick them out of the house if it starts to affect the spirit in our home. And if they break the law, I won't stop the cops from sending them to juvie hall. We have our rules. They know what it is. I'm not going to go buy them their cigarettes because they got themselves hooked on it. But yes, I'll pay for the rehab if they decide to come back to the fold. And yes, I've talked to the kids - ages 8 and 10 - about this already, including the horrors of juvie hall.

Edited February 23, 2012 by anatess

[Backroads]

I'm with anatess. If my hypothetical kid came to me like someone who wanted to be responsible and not secretive about sex and asked for assistance, I might be willing to negotiate.

But a teen who knows full-well the possibilites should not expect anything different.

[Gwen]

What if the kid was already taking care of the protection as part of these activities behind the parents' back? Suppose kid is buying condoms or already obtained a bc prescription (doable in many states without needing parent's knowledge)? When parent finds out, should he/she take over? Or is there anything wrong with parents, after finding out child's indiscretions, on informing them they expect them to provide financially for at least some of the protection?

I'm not criticizing your answer, just thinking further.

If the kid is already taking care of the precautions then let them continue. Tell them you are disappointed in their choice to have premarital sex but very proud of them for being responsible and you expect them to continue to be responsible as long as that is their choice. Make it clear you are not condoning it and they are not welcome to bring that choice into your home.

I have no issue if the parents find out the kid is making poor choices and saying the child has to help pay for it. I don't see a difference in that and making them pay for their speeding ticket or other foolish choices teens can make.

But I do think parents should take some kind of responsibility if the kid isn't. Again I will reference the girl I already mentioned, under 18 and 2 kids... obviously she won't choose to not have sex and she won't choose to take her pills... time to put in a 5 yr iud. When you expect others to take care of you and the consequences of your choices then expect them to get involved. Now if she moved out, got a job, supported her kids etc then if she chooses to have more kids is her problem/decision. But right now she expects mom to raise her kids while the gov't provides for them. This isn't good for anyone, especially the children being born into this situation.

[Backroads]

It is always tragic when kids get involves. No one wants kids starving on the streets, but the conundrum is who shoulders the responsibility.

[Guest]

If the kid is already taking care of the precautions then let them continue. Tell them you are disappointed in their choice to have premarital sex but very proud of them for being responsible and you expect them to continue to be responsible as long as that is their choice. Make it clear you are not condoning it and they are not welcome to bring that choice into your home.

I have no issue if the parents find out the kid is making poor choices and saying the child has to help pay for it. I don't see a difference in that and making them pay for their speeding ticket or other foolish choices teens can make.

But I do think parents should take some kind of responsibility if the kid isn't. Again I will reference the girl I already mentioned, under 18 and 2 kids... obviously she won't choose to not have sex and she won't choose to take her pills... time to put in a 5 yr iud. When you expect others to take care of you and the consequences of your choices then expect them to get involved. Now if she moved out, got a job, supported her kids etc then if she chooses to have more kids is her problem/decision. But right now she expects mom to raise her kids while the gov't provides for them. This isn't good for anyone, especially the children being born into this situation.

If you got a kid under 18 with 2 kids you got a much bigger problem that you are ignoring. The IUD does not solve THAT problem.

[RMGuy]

Shouldn't the kids have been aware of the wise decision of protection and therefore informed a responsible adult party of their need? It's not like teenagers don't have access these days to basic knowledge of consequences and a vague idea of how to protect themselves.

If the kids didn't want pregnancy or STDs, they would have stepped up earlier.

Backroads,

I agree wholeheartedly that they have some responsibility. What I would be concerned about is that if the parent is adamantly opposed under all circumstances to BC, then how open will they be percieved by their children to discuss this with them?

Honest question.

-RM

[Blackmarch]

I wanted to ask everyone (parents and non-parents) this question and that's why I posted it here instead of the Parenting forum. Should girls (under 18) be put on birth control if they're dating? This topic came up between my husband and I after watching a news segment on the Sex Ed Bill here in Utah. Note: this thread is not about the Sex Ed Bill :] So, are you completely against the idea? Open to considering it? Or completely for it? What are the pros and cons? What are some of the potential consequences of doing it and not doing it?

they should not have to.

I kinda feel sorry for the ones that have to, and hope the make better choices over bad choices.

Were I in the situation of having a teenaged daughter, hopefully she would be aware of the consequences and will have made the choice not to participate in the kinds of activities that would require such.

If she did require such, then she's gonna have to work for it.

Should they be required to by law? no. no one should be required by law to take drugs, ever.

nor would i want to pay for someone elses contraceptives, condoms, or sterilizations or abortions surguries..

Edited February 23, 2012 by Blackmarch

[RMGuy]

I'm of a different mindset. Our house teaches abstinence as the policy. If my children decide to not follow that policy (and yes, we have very open dialogue in our house), then it's up to them to deal with each and every consequence including birth control. They're 8 and 10 right now and they already know quite a bit about the consequences. They know where my husband and I stand on the matter. We will stand firm on our principles but be there to hold their hand while they suffer the consequences if it comes to that. And like Gwen said - this is not just pregnancy, etc. It includes the emotional and spiritual consequences first and foremost. Hate the sin, love the sinner.

It's the same as drugs, alcohol, cigarettes... They know the consequences. They deal with it themselves. I'll even go so far as to kick them out of the house if it starts to affect the spirit in our home. And if they break the law, I won't stop the cops from sending them to juvie hall. We have our rules. They know what it is. I'm not going to go buy them their cigarettes because they got themselves hooked on it. But yes, I'll pay for the rehab if they decide to come back to the fold. And yes, I've talked to the kids - ages 8 and 10 - about this already, including the horrors of juvie hall.

Perhaps the best part of agency is that we can disagree, and sometimes learn from each other. I can respect where you are coming from Anatess.

I am trying to understand, and want to see if I am getting what you are saying? So for you, if your daughter or son decided to have sex, you expect them to be the responsible part to find BC for themselves.

If they did this and you discovered it, how would you react?

If they came to you to ask for help in accomplishing this, how would you react?

Thank you for a civil discussion on a difficult and emotionally charged subject.

-RM

[RMGuy]

they should not have to.

I kinda feel sorry for the ones that have to, and hope the make better choices over bad choices.

What if they don't have to, but they want to?

-RM

[Gwen]

If you got a kid under 18 with 2 kids you got a much bigger problem that you are ignoring. The IUD does not solve THAT problem.

I know there are bigger problems and they are not being ignored. I'm doing all that I can to address them. But it would help a lot of at the minimum she would stop having babies. I can't make her gain a testimony or self worth or anything else that addresses the bigger problem. All I can do is lead her to those opportunities. It will be up to her to do the work.

I don't think bc solves the problem but it takes a major piece of the puzzle out of play, it prevents creating more victims, and changes the situation so that the other issues can be addressed.

On the other hand I would say that any time you have a teen that is sexually active you have a situation with bigger problems than the risk of pregnancy. The fact that this is a topic of discussion shows how big the problem is.

[Backroads]

Backroads,

I agree wholeheartedly that they have some responsibility. What I would be concerned about is that if the parent is adamantly opposed under all circumstances to BC, then how open will they be percieved by their children to discuss this with them?

Honest question.

-RM

And a very good question.

My arguments tend to apply in a family situation where it's reasonable to assume there are expectations and communication in place.

[Guest]

Perhaps the best part of agency is that we can disagree, and sometimes learn from each other. I can respect where you are coming from Anatess.

This isn't the first time, I think, that we're on different sides of the fence. And it's great that we can work through differences and not have to feel pressured to agree.

I am trying to understand, and want to see if I am getting what you are saying? So for you, if your daughter or son decided to have sex, you expect them to be the responsible part to find BC for themselves.

Correct. I don't have anything against BC. I have something against engaging in sexual relations outside of marriage. Make sense? So, BC will be discussed, when the time comes, to my children but within the context of marriage and the law of chastity.

If they decide to jump the gun, they would already know how I feel about it and they would already know they're going off the reservation on that one and would not have much support from me, so they'll have to figure it all out themselves.

If they did this and you discovered it, how would you react?

The same way I would react if I find drug paraphernalia in their room. We're going to have a pow-wow on it with me reminding them about why we don't engage in premarital sex (I'm usually the one that gets angry and start yelling because I have a temper problem - my kids know this too.) and, like my husband always does, with him being the voice of reason asking them what we can do to help them turn their lives around.

Now, if they are not willing nor ready to turn their lives around, then they get to deal with our disappointment. Oh, I can just see this now - when we do our family prayers, "And please, Heavenly Father, open my sons' eyes that he may see the folly of his actions...". And yeah, they're probably going to lose privileges - like their car if they have one - to make it harder for them to engage in whatever it is they're engaging in. And, of course, we're probably going to have a pow-wow with the girl's parents too.

When I think about these things, I thank God again that I have 2 boys.

If they came to you to ask for help in accomplishing this, how would you react?

I know EXACTLY how I will react. Imagine this... Me, with one eyebrow up, hands on hips, incredulous expression on my face telling my child, "Are you NUTS? Sure, I'll help you with that dear, it's called (deleted by moderator)!".

Thank you for a civil discussion on a difficult and emotionally charged subject.

-RM

Of course, my kids are 8 and 10... ask me again in 6 years. Because, right now, I'm still quite confident that my kids know (or will know) how to handle themselves in that situation. I give my kids a lot of credit... because, well... they haven't messed up royally yet.

Edited February 23, 2012 by pam

[MarginOfError]

Well, that's just the thing. I don't believe in avoiding consequences. Consequences is part and parcel of every decision.

But to some people, birth control is another choice. It just so happens that it's a choice you aren't allowing your children*

*and I don't mean to imply whether that's good or bad. Again, just explaining life on the other side of the fence.

[pam]

May I remind everyone this is a LDS site. Let's try and keep comments respectful of that.

Some comments and wording of comments are just not appropriate for this site.

Edited February 23, 2012 by pam

[Guest]

But to some people, birth control is another choice. It just so happens that it's a choice you aren't allowing your children*

*and I don't mean to imply whether that's good or bad. Again, just explaining life on the other side of the fence.

Artificial Birth Control is not the choice for teen-agers. When you're married, sure you got the whole gamut of BC options open to you.

It's not a matter of *allowing* children to have BC. It's a matter of me saying the BC option for you as my child is not to engage in sex. If you want other options, you go figure it out on your own because I'm not going there with you.

[RMGuy]

This isn't the first time, I think, that we're on different sides of the fence. And it's great that we can work through differences and not have to feel pressured to agree.

Correct. I don't have anything against BC. I have something against engaging in sexual relations outside of marriage. Make sense? So, BC will be discussed, when the time comes, to my children but within the context of marriage and the law of chastity.

If they decide to jump the gun, they would already know how I feel about it and they would already know they're going off the reservation on that one and would not have much support from me, so they'll have to figure it all out themselves.

The same way I would react if I find drug paraphernalia in their room. We're going to have a pow-wow on it with me reminding them about why we don't engage in premarital sex (I'm usually the one that gets angry and start yelling because I have a temper problem - my kids know this too.) and, like my husband always does, with him being the voice of reason asking them what we can do to help them turn their lives around.

Now, if they are not willing nor ready to turn their lives around, then they get to deal with our disappointment. Oh, I can just see this now - when we do our family prayers, "And please, Heavenly Father, open my sons' eyes that he may see the folly of his actions...". And yeah, they're probably going to lose privileges - like their car if they have one - to make it harder for them to engage in whatever it is they're engaging in. And, of course, we're probably going to have a pow-wow with the girl's parents too.

When I think about these things, I thank God again that I have 2 boys.

I know EXACTLY how I will react. Imagine this... Me, with one eyebrow up, hands on hips, icredulous expression on my face telling my child, "Are you NUTS? Sure, I'll help you with that dear, it's called (deleted by moderator)!".

Of course, my kids are 8 and 10... ask me again in 6 years. Because, right now, I'm still quite confident that my kids know (or will know) how to handle themselves in that situation. I give my kids a lot of credit... because, well... they haven't messed up royally yet.

We aren't as far apart as you might think. Completely agree with you on the sex outside marriage thing. Completely agree with you on if I find out about it we are going to have a serious discussion. Completely agree that depending on what it is they could lose privileges.

I would probably react a bit different than "are you NUTS" but that is probably more a function of personality than it is belief...lol! I would help them find BC if they came to me openly and honestly and they had thought it through...even though I disagree with their choice. Kinda like if my daughter decided to go get a piercing I disagreed with. I would rather her come to me and take her somewhere to make sure it was done correctly and safely than have her try it on her own in her room with an ice cube and a needle. LOL!

Again Anatess, you're right we might end up on different sides of the fence from time to time, but I do appreciate the way in which you disagree. It challenges me to consider my opinions and helps me to see the other side.

-RM

Edited February 23, 2012 by pam

[Blocky]

I like that birth control and condoms are easily available to teenagers without their parents consent. I probably wouldn't like the idea except that I remember being a teenager who had friends who were sexually active and didn't always talk to their parents about sex.

Putting teenagers on birth control just because they're a teenager, absolutely not. I'm not sure if this is the norm in most wards, but most of my teenage LDS friends were not having sex.

I think accompanying your teen to the OB/GYN, but letting them have the exam and conversations with the dr. alone is a good idea.

Ok, for real... if my 16 year old daughter who I thought was not having sex, was,and I found out, I'd go crazy and probably forbid her from every leaving the house and buy a gun and do all the 'wrong' things when it comes to getting teens to respect and follow your rules.

[rameumptom]

I am with Anatess. Sex is only to be within marriage. If a child/grandchild thinks he/she is adult enough to have sex, then he/she is adult enough to find his/her own BC and take the responsibility along with the risks.

When we jump in and tell them "don't do this, but if you do I will be there to provide you with all the things necessary to avoid consequences", then we may as well just decorate their bedroom with leather and lace now.

Instead, we need to tell them: this is God's law. These are the risks of disobeying (spiritual and physical), and these are the things you will take responsibility for if you choose a path other than the one God wants you to follow.

Our world is filled with sex education and prophylactics already. Any kid can get a condom at the corner gas station, from friends, or online. I don't need to be their supplier and enabler.

[Shelly200]

I'll have to admit to jumping in here on the end and not reading every single comment. But to the original question, I would say that hormonal birth control is not healthy for women of any age -- the hormones in BC pills are a class 1 carcinogen... not good. Of course, as a (faithful) Catholic I am against all forms of contraception and abortion, as well other life-taking issues, such as the death penalty, suicide, euthanasia, and unjust war. The Catholic Church teaches that every life is sacred, from conception to natural death, and since almost every hormonal birth control has abortifacient properties, we are adamantly against them. But not only that... sex is strictly to be within the confines of the covenant of Holy Marriage. And every sexual act must be open to life (so, no contraception within marriage either!), because that is the whole reason God created sex-- for His creations to be fruitful and multiply. If we are using sex strictly for our own pleasure and not being open to the creation of life, then we are sullying God's plan for sex and interfering with His design.

I honestly would think that the LDS church would have a similar stance on birth control. Because I see the LDS view of marriage as something so holy and sacred that it is part of God's plan for salvation and exaltation. And the family unit was created specifically by God as the proper environment for our spirit brothers and sisters to receive their mortal bodies on Earth. So I would think that the LDS church would have a specific position against birth control and abortion, because they both impede God's plan of salvation in preventing spirit children from gaining mortal bodies, and altering the original command of God for husband and wife to be fruitful and multiply...

So I guess what I'm saying is that I'd be interested to hear 1.) if the LDS church has any official stance on birth control, and 2.) what reasoning the church has for that stance.