The partnership at Drugfree.org and MetLife Foundation has released a new study that revealed some shocking news about today's teens and their thoughts about alcohol. Underage drinking has become the norm and teens seem to have access to all the alcohol they wish to consume. The attitudes of the current generation are much different from those in the past. Today's teens see no harm in consuming five drinks a day. 68% of teens surveyed said they had consumed alcohol, and a quarter of those said they had their first drink at the age of 12 or even younger. Top reasons for drinking included "so they won't feel left out" and "because it's fun". Teen drinking sets up a whole domino effect of problems. A child who is 13 or 14 may have no concept of the danger it poses, from alcohol poisoning, to vulnerability to rape or molestation, to any number of dangerous positions they may land in, with no ability to fend for themselves. They don't believe it will happen to them or that their judgment will be impaired. They feel invincible. They feel they can handle it.
Local teens have mentioned to me that it's easy to obtain alcohol or drugs at school and kids are actually doing those things on campus during the school day. 25% of the teens surveyed in the study stated that they had smoked marijuana in the past month. This is a trend that is significant because for a decade, there were declines in the use of pot among teens. Now that has turned around and use is increasing. Small wonder, when "medical" marijuana co-ops are springing up everywhere. Kids know it's just a front for sales. If adults can do it, why can't they? Ecstacy abuse has also increased dramatically, up 67% according to the study. Often when I hear from birth mothers planning an adoption, they state that they were "at a party", "at a bar", or "drinking" when they became pregnant. Sometimes they don't know how it happened or who they were with because there were many people at the party. Obviously, if they weren't drinking, they would have had better control of the situation and themselves. Putting themselves in a vulnerable position may result in pregnancy, but could result in much worse.
While parents feel powerless to stop the behavior, teens are seeing little risk in regular use of alcohol and drugs, and are increasingly trying and using them. They see it as no big deal. As our nation slips further and further down the list of those leading in education and technology, the next generation is medicating themselves into apathy. So for those who are worried about the current job situation -- consider going into alcohol and drug counseling and rehab services. We're going to need you. Just ask Charlie Sheen.
Showing posts with label teens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teens. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Friday, November 5, 2010
Teens and Oral Contraceptives: Putting it all in Perspective
The following article was written by a guest blogger, Matt Phillips. Matt is a young professional who has found his voice in advocating for Women's health. He has shared some good points. I would add that in terms of contraceptives, I have serious concerns about Depo Provera. I jokingly refer to it as a "fertility drug," as a good number of our birth mothers report having been on Depo at the time they conceived. Whether it is being allowed to expire or it's actually failing is unknown. I would caution all women when using this form of birth control to also use a condom as well, as it seems to be unreliable and condoms allow for further protection from sexually-transmitted diseases.
"The advent and subsequent popularity of certain birth control methods have led to a welcome decline in teen pregnancy throughout the United States. However, these methods, most notably oral contraceptives, also bring forth a host of further risks. Unfortunately, teens tend to fixate on avoiding pregnancy, arguably because it's the most visible consequence. However, with such well-established and successful adoption programs in place to bring life to a family unable to have children, these drugs deserve deeper scrutiny before young adults hastily decide to use them.
One major factor of these drugs is their potentially damaging side effects.While pregnancy rates in this country have declined, sexually transmitted disease rates continue to grow. However, these drugs do nothing to address that specific concern. Worse still, these pills might actually encourage unprotected sex, tempting naive young adults to believe they're safe against all the unwanted outcomes of sex. The legitimizing effects of these pills, followed by the accelerated spread of disease, are a serious health concern parents and young adults need to consider when considering an oral contraceptive.
Unfortunately, parents cannot rely on schools to address the dangers of these contraceptives. With U.S. government's renewal of its $50 million a year funding over five years for abstinence-focused education, teens might not receive the unbiased information needed to make the right choice regarding this contraceptive. Worse still, schools might totally refuse to discuss this contraception because it conflicts with the curriculum's assertion that abstinence should be the sole method teens use regarding sexuality. With the government's strong stance against teen sex, and by extension, contraception, parents simply can't rely on schools to thoroughly discuss this particular drug.
Even worse than schools at discussing the details of these drugs, the manufacturers of contraceptives regularly fail to mention important information regarding their safety. One producer, Bayer Health Care, was recently cited by the FDA for having misleading television advertisements about its products. Promoting their product as a total quality-of-life improvement, these ads further mislead teens into choosing these drugs based on unproven claims. Furthermore, Bayer was also cited for substandard conditions in on of the plants of its hormone-manufacturing providers.
With the charges that have been levied against this oral contraceptive maker, it's of little surprise that the extreme physical consequences of these drugs also have not been released by the manufacturer. These hormone-altering pills actually lead to permanent side effects, like the possibility of infertility. Originally introduced in the 1960's, some critics argue these oral contraceptives might also be to blame in the elevated cancer incidences for women in the U.S. Although easily dismissed by young people as harmless and a "safe alternative," these drugs literally disrupt many significant aspects of life including sexual, emotional, and physical health.
In fact, the growing number of complaints against oral contraceptives, exemplified by pending Yaz lawsuits, indicates that the short-term safety of such birth control options is far from certain. Users of this particular product have seen serious, and sometimes fatal, side effects including heart attack, stroke, blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, and gallbladder disease. However, because schools refuse to recognize anything but abstinence as a legitimate lifestyle, these facts are rarely discussed with teens.
With such a strong adoption system in place and so many options to mothers, it's unfortunate so many women continue to utilize such a dangerous method to avoid pregnancy. Regrettably, a serious lack of information flow, both from schools, the media, and the manufacturer itself, is largely to blame. Worse still, young women feel they actually are protected when using this contraceptive, leading to even more undesired consequences. Like many social solutions, the use of this drug and the negative consequences it causes can only effectively be solved if teens are empowered with actual information about it limitations, side effects, and less-damaging alternatives that also protect against sexually transmitted disease. Furthermore, teaching teens that adoption is a noble act might act as further motivation for teens to take their focus of the relatively-short term effects of pregnancy and consider the serious physical consequences of oral contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases."
"The advent and subsequent popularity of certain birth control methods have led to a welcome decline in teen pregnancy throughout the United States. However, these methods, most notably oral contraceptives, also bring forth a host of further risks. Unfortunately, teens tend to fixate on avoiding pregnancy, arguably because it's the most visible consequence. However, with such well-established and successful adoption programs in place to bring life to a family unable to have children, these drugs deserve deeper scrutiny before young adults hastily decide to use them.
One major factor of these drugs is their potentially damaging side effects.While pregnancy rates in this country have declined, sexually transmitted disease rates continue to grow. However, these drugs do nothing to address that specific concern. Worse still, these pills might actually encourage unprotected sex, tempting naive young adults to believe they're safe against all the unwanted outcomes of sex. The legitimizing effects of these pills, followed by the accelerated spread of disease, are a serious health concern parents and young adults need to consider when considering an oral contraceptive.
Unfortunately, parents cannot rely on schools to address the dangers of these contraceptives. With U.S. government's renewal of its $50 million a year funding over five years for abstinence-focused education, teens might not receive the unbiased information needed to make the right choice regarding this contraceptive. Worse still, schools might totally refuse to discuss this contraception because it conflicts with the curriculum's assertion that abstinence should be the sole method teens use regarding sexuality. With the government's strong stance against teen sex, and by extension, contraception, parents simply can't rely on schools to thoroughly discuss this particular drug.
Even worse than schools at discussing the details of these drugs, the manufacturers of contraceptives regularly fail to mention important information regarding their safety. One producer, Bayer Health Care, was recently cited by the FDA for having misleading television advertisements about its products. Promoting their product as a total quality-of-life improvement, these ads further mislead teens into choosing these drugs based on unproven claims. Furthermore, Bayer was also cited for substandard conditions in on of the plants of its hormone-manufacturing providers.
With the charges that have been levied against this oral contraceptive maker, it's of little surprise that the extreme physical consequences of these drugs also have not been released by the manufacturer. These hormone-altering pills actually lead to permanent side effects, like the possibility of infertility. Originally introduced in the 1960's, some critics argue these oral contraceptives might also be to blame in the elevated cancer incidences for women in the U.S. Although easily dismissed by young people as harmless and a "safe alternative," these drugs literally disrupt many significant aspects of life including sexual, emotional, and physical health.
In fact, the growing number of complaints against oral contraceptives, exemplified by pending Yaz lawsuits, indicates that the short-term safety of such birth control options is far from certain. Users of this particular product have seen serious, and sometimes fatal, side effects including heart attack, stroke, blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, and gallbladder disease. However, because schools refuse to recognize anything but abstinence as a legitimate lifestyle, these facts are rarely discussed with teens.
With such a strong adoption system in place and so many options to mothers, it's unfortunate so many women continue to utilize such a dangerous method to avoid pregnancy. Regrettably, a serious lack of information flow, both from schools, the media, and the manufacturer itself, is largely to blame. Worse still, young women feel they actually are protected when using this contraceptive, leading to even more undesired consequences. Like many social solutions, the use of this drug and the negative consequences it causes can only effectively be solved if teens are empowered with actual information about it limitations, side effects, and less-damaging alternatives that also protect against sexually transmitted disease. Furthermore, teaching teens that adoption is a noble act might act as further motivation for teens to take their focus of the relatively-short term effects of pregnancy and consider the serious physical consequences of oral contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases."
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Be Careful What You Wish For
My son, a freshman in high school, seems to forget his lunch money on a regular basis. Now, some would say "Let him go hungry a few times and he'll remember", which is probably true. But, I'm a softy and don't want him to miss lunch and go through the afternoon distracted or lethargic. I recently made a trip to the administration office to leave his lunch money. The secretary asked me, "Could you text him to let him know to come to the office?". Wow, is it just me or do you not remember sending that notice home that it's best that students NOT bring their cell phones to class? Cell phones are either a blessing or a curse, and I'm not sure which much of the time. Most schools don't like cell phones in the classroom because of distractions, rings, and the potential for cheating via text. My own son got into trouble when I noticed text messages on the bill during school hours.
Recent reports of teens "sexting" have been surfacing in the news. While prosecuting teens for child pornography because of sexting between kids seems a bit absurd to me (there has to be a more appropriate punishment), I have to wonder why it has come to this. I don't think parents know what is going on, particularly that their teens are taking provocative pictures of themselves and sending them out into the etherworld. While they may be meant for only one person to see, once sent these pictures can circulate among other teens, adults, and even hit the internet. All of that can come back to haunt someone, as is the case recently with a teacher who was fired because of provocative pictures which showed up on the internet. Concerned parents didn't really care how they got there. The fact that they were there was enough. Kids need to be educated as to what can happen if they put their fate in the hands of other kids, some of whom may not have the best judgment.
So much for the theory that most teens have poor body image! I'm not sure what has changed in the years since I was a teen to cause kids to feel open enough to expose themselves so easily, but the phenomenon is disturbing, given that this is going on with not only teens, but grammar school children. I do agree that something has to be done to prevent this from happening and to protect naive children from giving these images to the wrong people, or anyone for that matter. I am going to look into a non-camera phone for my son. I think it might be too tempting for an adolescent boy not to look at potentially lewd pictures. In my day, the boys had to go out searching for pornography. Now it comes to them!
Well, for those of you who are about to adopt or who have young children, be careful what you wish for! You'll be dealing with teens soon enough. And don't get me started on science fair!
Recent reports of teens "sexting" have been surfacing in the news. While prosecuting teens for child pornography because of sexting between kids seems a bit absurd to me (there has to be a more appropriate punishment), I have to wonder why it has come to this. I don't think parents know what is going on, particularly that their teens are taking provocative pictures of themselves and sending them out into the etherworld. While they may be meant for only one person to see, once sent these pictures can circulate among other teens, adults, and even hit the internet. All of that can come back to haunt someone, as is the case recently with a teacher who was fired because of provocative pictures which showed up on the internet. Concerned parents didn't really care how they got there. The fact that they were there was enough. Kids need to be educated as to what can happen if they put their fate in the hands of other kids, some of whom may not have the best judgment.
So much for the theory that most teens have poor body image! I'm not sure what has changed in the years since I was a teen to cause kids to feel open enough to expose themselves so easily, but the phenomenon is disturbing, given that this is going on with not only teens, but grammar school children. I do agree that something has to be done to prevent this from happening and to protect naive children from giving these images to the wrong people, or anyone for that matter. I am going to look into a non-camera phone for my son. I think it might be too tempting for an adolescent boy not to look at potentially lewd pictures. In my day, the boys had to go out searching for pornography. Now it comes to them!
Well, for those of you who are about to adopt or who have young children, be careful what you wish for! You'll be dealing with teens soon enough. And don't get me started on science fair!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Safe-Haven Laws and the Nebraska Debacle
Recently, in an effort to make it easier for women who have experienced unplanned pregnancy to safely surrender a child, and perhaps reduce the number of abandoned babies left to die in dumpsters or on doorsteps, Nebraska passed a Safe-Haven law. 48 states and Puerto Rico have already adopted these Safe-Haven laws, an incentive for overwhelmed parents to leave their newborns at a hospital, police or fire station, or another designated safe place. Typically, the laws designate that an infant up to one month old may be surrendered this way without repercussions to the parents.
Nebraska lawmakers apparently didn't review the fine print in these existing laws before enacting their own "safe-haven" guidelines. The Nebraska law provided safe-haven for any child under the age of 19, rather than specifying infants. A total of 26 older children have been left at Nebraska hospitals since July. Obviously those Nebraska lawmakers are either too young or too old to have teens at home. Any of us who have shared a domicile with a 14-year-old would know better! I don't think I've met the parent of a teenager who hasn't thought (perhaps just for an instant) about abdicating their parental responsibilities a time or two. Teenagers can be a challenge. In Nebraska, this little oversight in the wording of the law has caused a fair amount of chaos as teen after teen is "dropped off" for safekeeping at hospitals. The very law that was intended to keep parents from abandoning their babies, is causing them to abandon their teens.
In one case, a man left nine of his children at a hospital in Omaha. The Department of Health and Human Services officials stated they wouldn't take any children older than age 17. That leaves some of those abandoned in limbo. Where should they go? The Nebraska Legislature has called a special session to tackle the issue on November 14, at which time a bill will be introduced establishing a 3-day-old age limit. When will they learn? Isn't that going from one extreme to another? At 3 days of age, an infant has likely just been discharged from the hospital. The parent(s) won't feel overwhelmed by caring for that infant for a few days or weeks. Why not establish a 6 month limitation? Throwing the baby out with the bath water is not the solution!
Particularly if you live in Nebraska, but even if you don't, if you feel that 72 hours is too short a period of time for a parent to feel overwhelmed and choose to surrender her child, please e-mail the author of bill LB 157 as soon as possible. Please urge 3-6 months at least as a reasonable cut-off time frame. Safe-Haven laws are absolutely necessary and will save lives, however, this one is threatening to defeat it's own purpose a second time. I have already written an e-mail to Senator Arnie Stuthman at 'astuthman@leg.ne.gov'. Please join me in letting him know that while his intentions are good, this time limit is not. It is, perhaps, wise to let the other legislators in Nebraska know this as well so that they can respond appropriately to this urgent issue. These babies deserve our help.
And by the way, inevitably obnoxious teenagers all started out as those adorable babies! Be careful what you wish for! There's a "no return" policy!
Nebraska lawmakers apparently didn't review the fine print in these existing laws before enacting their own "safe-haven" guidelines. The Nebraska law provided safe-haven for any child under the age of 19, rather than specifying infants. A total of 26 older children have been left at Nebraska hospitals since July. Obviously those Nebraska lawmakers are either too young or too old to have teens at home. Any of us who have shared a domicile with a 14-year-old would know better! I don't think I've met the parent of a teenager who hasn't thought (perhaps just for an instant) about abdicating their parental responsibilities a time or two. Teenagers can be a challenge. In Nebraska, this little oversight in the wording of the law has caused a fair amount of chaos as teen after teen is "dropped off" for safekeeping at hospitals. The very law that was intended to keep parents from abandoning their babies, is causing them to abandon their teens.
In one case, a man left nine of his children at a hospital in Omaha. The Department of Health and Human Services officials stated they wouldn't take any children older than age 17. That leaves some of those abandoned in limbo. Where should they go? The Nebraska Legislature has called a special session to tackle the issue on November 14, at which time a bill will be introduced establishing a 3-day-old age limit. When will they learn? Isn't that going from one extreme to another? At 3 days of age, an infant has likely just been discharged from the hospital. The parent(s) won't feel overwhelmed by caring for that infant for a few days or weeks. Why not establish a 6 month limitation? Throwing the baby out with the bath water is not the solution!
Particularly if you live in Nebraska, but even if you don't, if you feel that 72 hours is too short a period of time for a parent to feel overwhelmed and choose to surrender her child, please e-mail the author of bill LB 157 as soon as possible. Please urge 3-6 months at least as a reasonable cut-off time frame. Safe-Haven laws are absolutely necessary and will save lives, however, this one is threatening to defeat it's own purpose a second time. I have already written an e-mail to Senator Arnie Stuthman at 'astuthman@leg.ne.gov'. Please join me in letting him know that while his intentions are good, this time limit is not. It is, perhaps, wise to let the other legislators in Nebraska know this as well so that they can respond appropriately to this urgent issue. These babies deserve our help.
And by the way, inevitably obnoxious teenagers all started out as those adorable babies! Be careful what you wish for! There's a "no return" policy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)