By Sarah White, Special for USA TODAY
Since Jan. 1, California 12-year-olds can get prevention services for sexually transmitted diseases — including the HPV vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine and HIV post-exposure medications — without parental consent. California joins a handful of states with STD-prevention language in their minor-consent laws, including Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota and Washington, D.C.
The key to STD prevention is catching kids before they have sex, which is by ninth grade for nearly one-third of teenagers, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports.
Right now, minors in all states can be diagnosed and treated for STDs without a parent’s involvement.
Tips for parents about discussing sex
•Use the teen’s daily life. Whether it’s a Twilight story line or a pregnant classmate, the sexual behaviors around your teen provide great conversation starters, says Carol Ford, chief of adolescent medicine at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “Ask your teen, ‘What’s your take on that?’ when they’re talking about something happening to their friend” to gauge how your teen sees things and help teens shape their own views.
•Talk early and often. ”Plant the idea that you will listen in a non-threatening way, which builds trust,” says Abigail English, director of the Center for Adolescent Health & the Law. If teens can’t ask you for help, send them to an aunt, grandparent or friend’s mother.
•Be “askable.” Teens are more likely to talk when they feel they won’t be judged, says Claire Brindis, professor of pediatrics at the University of California-San Francisco. Try leaving pamphlets on contraception or STDs lying around and asking your teen what he or she thinks.
•Don’t be alarmed. Parents might be upset to see an STD vaccination listed on a health insurance explanation of benefits. But remember, those vaccines are for prevention and do not mean your teen has actually had sex.
Another great post from Walt Mueller‘s Blog from CPYU…
Here’s the story. . . . It seems that the New Canaan Black 8th grade football team made the playoffs. They reached the semi-finals but lost. That left them in third place. A few weeks after season’s end, the team had a little party at one player’s home. The players’ parents decided to celebrate the team’s season and success by presenting their boys with trophies. . . third place trophies. The coaches then gathered the boys up and took them and their trophies to a local park, where the coaches then proceeded to have the boys burn the trophies. All three coaches lost their jobs after the incident went public. One coach apologized, saying the message they intended to send was positive one. Residents of the town are concerned that the message that was sent was all wrong – that not finishing first is the same as failure.
As I think about this story, there are a couple of things to ponder here. As a parent of kids who were athletes and as someone who coached for years, I value a positive athletic experience. Athletics is about learning, putting forth an effort, cooperation, and having fun. I never believed that “winning is the only thing.” I know there are coaches that scream, yell, and coach for nobody but themselves. Not good.
On the other hand, we live in a world where kids are coddled, hovered over, and buffered from consequences by parents who are far too child-centered. Everybody needs to get a trophy, a pat on the back, and a “you’re awesome!” even when the effort is mediocre or sub-par. Not good as well.
So, while I don’t fault the parents in this story (I don’t really know. . . I wasn’t there nor do I know the families), it does serve as a reminder that 1)we’ve placed too high a premium on winning, and 2) we coddle our kids way too much. Both are threads running through the fabric of today’s youth culture. In this story the threads cross. . . and look what happened.
What do you think?
The Algonquin Village Board Tuesday gave initial approval to a new ordinance banning sale, possession or use of synthetic marijuana within the village. When formally approved it would make Algonquin the first community in McHenry and northern Kane counties to ban “incense” treated with lab versions of cannabinoids, stimulants or hallucinogens that are legal in the sense that the Drug Enforcement Agency hasn’t had time to outlaw them yet.
“Our officers talked to some of the kids,” said Chief Russ Laine. “They say they have it because it’s legal, it’s easy to get and you can’t fail a (drug) test for it.”
Activists complained to the Board earlier this month that synthetic marijuana was a danger to local youth but readily available in local head and tobacco shops. Laine agreed the stuff was dangerous. “The results…you don’t know what the results will be. Just in Algonquin we’ve had hallucinations, convulsions, aggressive behavior.”
The proposed ordinance is based on one drafted by Aurora and the North Central Narcotics Task Force to combat the problem there. It bans sale, possession or use of 16 cannabinoid compounds, 17 stimulants plus 4 different ways to turn them into something else that still works and 8 psychedelics “including salts, isomers, esters and ethers of salts of isomers”. Laine said the Aurora ordinance passed only a couple of months ago so it still hasn’t encountered a legal challenge yet.
Member Bob Smith had problems with an absence of what lawyers call criminal intent. “Does this mean someone could be pulled over having a legal product they bought legally (elsewhere) and arrested here?” he asked. Yes, answered Village attorney Kelly Cahill because, “It’s not a criminal ordinance, it’s a civil act,” she said. “It’s the only way we can handle it.”
The only question still unresolved is the penalty. The draft called for a $750 fine but President John Schmitt thought it ought to be more. “Maybe if it was $2,000 the parents would get involved and it would get some attention,” he said. If there’s a whopping fine, “I’ll take the blame, and I know there’ll be some, if I have to,” he said.
Another ordinance change given first approval Tuesday would tighten up a village ban on drug paraphernalia. Laine said, essentially, it doesn’t outlaw having “bongs and hookahs and pipes”, just ones with evidence they’ve ever been used.
Dec 11
12
What are your thoughts on this?
I saw this on Walt Mueller‘s Blog from CPYU…
You can read his reader’s responses here
Nov 11
10
Glee Goes All the Way… Again
This week Doug Fields posted an article of mine on his blog encouraging parents to use the “pause button,” the “fast forward button”… and even the “off button” on their TV remotes as they co-view media with kids. Which button does Fox’s Glee require?
This week Glee featured two of the show’s teenage couples each losing their virginity, a homosexual couple (Kurt and Blaine), and a heterosexual couple (Finn and Rachel).
Parents that took time to even notice the show’s content this week are debating the appropriateness. The PTC is outraged (as always), and articles are beginning to emerge asking relevant questions, like this article from Time, What Teen Sex on Glee Really Teaches Kids.
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen Glee address the subject of teenagers losing their virginity. In the 15th episode of Season One, an episode titled “The Power of Madonna,” Glee introduced the same scenario when three couples faced the decision to lose their virginity (the episode was watched by 12.98 million American viewers and was critically acclaimed). After a dream sequence performance of Madonna’s Like a Virgin, two of these teenagers took the plunge and “went all the way” (Finn and Santana), while others didn’t (Rachel, for example).
With the ubiquity of ever more powerful cell phones, sexting has become an increasing concern for the parents of teenagers and preteens. This article describes how you can protect your child from the dangers of sexting, an activity that has major implications for long-term online reputation and electronic privacy.Sexting refers to sharing nude or near nude pictures, usually via a mobile phone. Most experts distinguish between sending naked photos, an activity with serious privacy, health and legal implications, and simply sending suggestive text messages, which is less harmful.
Understand why teenagers engage in sexting.
Lauren Biglow, a college freshman, once was one of those high school students with crazy, stressful schedules — high-level academics mixed with sports, clubs, community service, and way too little sleep, real food or unstructured fun.
“I would come home overflowing with stress over the fact that I had so many things to do simultaneously. And they would say, ‘This is crazy, listen to yourself. You need to take a breath, re-evaluate and decide what you need to cut down on.’ ”
Biglow says she did cut down, a bit, and ended up taking fewer Advanced Placement (AP) classes than some peers. She dropped one of her three sports. It worked out: The spring graduate of Los Altos High School, in California, is at highly regarded Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill.
Oct 11
11
What if your teen is a bully?
It’s the news no parent wants to hear: Their teenage daughter has been sending demeaning e-mails to another girl in her grade or that their son has been regularly harassing another boy in the hall at his school.
While it’s painful and confusing if your child is the victim of bullying, it’s also painful and confusing if your child is the one who is dishing it out. If it’s the latter, what do you do?
Let’s face it, to be confronted with the fact that your kid has been a bully is embarrassing. It’s not just a mark against your child, but a mark against you. You can just imagine what the other parents are saying.
“They always seemed like good parents. But it just goes to show you never know.”
You are mad at your kid for their behaviour, but also at how this behaviour reflects on you. To feel this way is very normal, but many kids of nice, loving parents engage in bullying behaviour. Having a kid who’s a bully does not mean that you have been a bad parent.
Mark Metherell
Peer pressure … teens are sending sexual images of themselves in order to fit in. Photo: Glen McCurtayne
TEENAGERS are feeling pressure to send sexual images of themselves and others by mobile phone in what is becoming a potentially pervasive practice of ”sexting”, according to government-funded research.
Young people are experiencing pressure not only from each other but also from the “insidious” influence of a sexualised media culture that pressured them to be involved in sexting in order to fit in, Melbourne University researcher Shelley Walker says.
Ms Walker told the Australasian Sexual Health Conference in Canberra yesterday young men were made to feel their masculinity was in question if they were not into sexting.
Women also felt pressure to participate when they saw sexted images of their friends.
Ms Walker, of the primary care research unit at Melbourne University, said her study involved interviews with 15 male and 19 female participants, aged 15 to 20. All of those interviewed had “at least one story to share, if not more”.
Editor’s note: LZ Granderson writes a weekly column for CNN.com. A senior writer and columnist for ESPN The Magazine and ESPN.com, he has contributed to ESPN’s “Sports Center,” “Outside the Lines” and “First Take.” He is a 2011 and 2010 nominee and the 2009 winner of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation award for online journalism and a 2010 and 2008 honoree of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association for column writing.
Grand Rapids, Michigan (CNN) — I saw someone at the airport the other day who really caught my eye.
Her beautiful, long blond hair was braided back a la Bo Derek in the movie “10″ (or for the younger set, Christina Aguilera during her “Xtina” phase). Her lips were pink and shiny from the gloss, and her earrings dangled playfully from her lobes.
You can tell she had been vacationing somewhere warm, because you could see her deep tan around her midriff thanks to the halter top and the tight sweatpants that rested just a little low on her waist. The icing on the cake? The word “Juicy” was written on her backside.
Yeah, that 8-year-old girl was something to see all right. … I hope her parents are proud. Their daughter was the sexiest girl in the terminal, and she’s not even in middle school yet.
Abercrombie & Fitch came under fire this spring for introducing the “Ashley,” a push-up bra for girls who normally are too young to have anything to push up. Originally it was marketed for girls as young as 7, but after public outcry, it raised its intended audience to the wise old age of 12. I wonder how do people initiate a conversation in the office about the undeveloped chest of elementary school girls without someone nearby thinking they’re pedophiles?
What kind of PowerPoint presentation was shown to the Abercrombie executives that persuaded them to green light such a product?
That there was a demand to make little girls hot?
I mean, that is the purpose of a push-up bra, right? To enhance sex appeal by lifting up, pushing together and basically showcasing the wearer’s breasts. Now, thanks to AF Kids, girls don’t have to wait until high school to feel self-conscious about their, uhm, girls. They can start almost as soon as they’re potty trained. Maybe this fall the retailer should consider keeping a plastic surgeon on site for free consultations.
We’ve been here with Abercrombie before — if you recall, about 10 years ago they sold thongs for 10-year-olds — but they’re hardly alone in pitching inappropriate clothing to young girls. Four years ago the popular “Bratz” franchise introduced padded bras called “bralettes” for girls as young as six. That was also around the time the good folks at Wal-Mart rolled out a pair of pink panties in its junior department with the phrase “Who Needs Credit Cards” printed on the front.
I guess I’ve been out-of-the-loop and didn’t realize there’s been an ongoing stampede of 10-year-old girls driving to the mall with their tiny fists full of cash demanding sexier apparel.
What’s that you say? Ten-year-olds can’t drive? They don’t have money, either? Well, how else are they getting ahold of these push-up bras and whore-friendly panties?
Their parents?
Noooo, couldn’t be.
What adult who wants a daughter to grow up with high self-esteem would even consider purchasing such items? What parent is looking at their sweet, little girl thinking, “She would be perfect if she just had a little bit more up top.”
And then I remember the little girl at the airport. And the girls we’ve all seen at the mall. And the kiddie beauty pageants.
And then I realize as creepy as it is to think a store like Abercrombie is offering something like the “Ashley”, the fact remains that sex only sells because people are buying it. No successful retailer would consider introducing an item like a padded bikini top for kindergartners if they didn’t think people would buy it.
If they didn’t think parents would buy it, which raises the question: What in the hell is wrong with us?
It’s easy to blast companies for introducing the sexy wear, but our ire really should be directed at the parents who think low rise jeans for a second grader is cute. They are the ones who are spending the money to fuel this budding trend. They are the ones who are suppose to decide what’s appropriate for their young children to wear, not executives looking to brew up controversy or turn a profit.
I get it, Rihanna’s really popular. But that’s a pretty weak reason for someone to dress their little girl like her.
I don’t care how popular Lil’ Wayne is, my son knows I would break both of his legs long before I would allow him to walk out of the house with his pants falling off his butt. Such a stance doesn’t always makes me popular — and the house does get tense from time to time — but I’m his father, not his friend.
Friends bow to peer pressure. Parents say, “No, and that’s the end of it.”
The way I see it, my son can go to therapy later if my strict rules have scarred him. But I have peace knowing he’ll be able to afford therapy as an adult because I didn’t allow him to wear or do whatever he wanted as a kid.
Maybe I’m a Tiger Dad.
Maybe I should mind my own business.
Or maybe I’m just a concerned parent worried about little girls like the one I saw at the airport.
In 2007, the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls issued a report linking early sexualization with three of the most common mental-health problems of girls and women: eating disorders, low self-esteem and depression. There’s nothing inherently wrong with parents wanting to appease their daughters by buying them the latest fashions. But is getting cool points today worth the harm dressing little girls like prostitutes could cause tomorrow?
A line needs to be drawn, but not by Abercrombie. Not by Britney Spears. And not by these little girls who don’t know better and desperately need their parents to be parents and not 40-year-old BFFs.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of LZ Granderson.
