You are on page 1of 4

Condoms in Schools

Yes because...
Providing condoms to students in public education programs will reduce the incidence of underage pre...
Providing condoms to students in public education programs will reduce the incidence of underage pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted
diseases. If one accepts the premise that condoms are an effective means of prevention, it stands to reason that their distribution could have a
significant impact.
No because...
Providing students with condoms actually encourages the earlier onset of sexual activity. If young people believe they will be safe when using a
condom they are much less likely to be deterred from engaging in dangerous and immoral behaviour.

Condoms in Schools
Yes because...
Providing condoms to students is the morally pragmatic thing to do. Educators need not endorse sexu...
Providing condoms to students is the morally pragmatic thing to do. Educators need not endorse sexual activity, but they can encourage students to
make wise choices if they decide to have sex. Such an approach is wise because it accepts the inevitability that some young people, regardless of
the strength of an abstinence message, will still have sex.
No because...
Presenting condoms to students in a publicly funded environment presents a potential offence to people from a variety of religions. Catholics and
followers of other religions who do not believe in birth control, and orthodox practitioners of a number of the worlds religions find the apparent
encouragement of sexual activity an affront to their religious traditions.

Condoms in Schools
Yes because...
Providing condoms to students is a wise investment of government funds. A fortune is spent by world...
Providing condoms to students is a wise investment of government funds. A fortune is spent by world governments each year addressing the public
health problems created by risky sexual behaviour. The cost of raising the many children created through unintended pregnancies over a lifetime can
be astronomical. The cost of treating a patient with HIV can be enormous.
No because...
Taxpayers should not have to support programs that they find morally objectionable, even if there seem to be pragmatic justifications for the action.
Moreover, if overall sexual activity increases as the result of encouraging 'safer sex', the number of people occasionally engaging in risky behaviour
will increase and the risk of these problems spreading will increase with it.

Condoms in Schools
Yes because...
Providing access to birth control empowers women with more control over their bodies. Historically ...
Providing access to birth control empowers women with more control over their bodies. Historically women have often suffered more because of
restrictive policies related to reproduction (abortion laws, restrictions on birth control purchases, parental consent policies). Men often dont have to
face the consequences of their actions. Condom distribution encourages the responsibility of men and increases choices for women. It can also
establish condom use as the norm, not something that women continually have to negotiate, often from a position of weakness.
No because...
Widespread condom distribution will establish sexual activity as the norm among young teens, creating peer pressure to participate in sex. The
added temptation to engage in sexual activity that is 'protected' will result in more women having sex at a younger age, perhaps furthering their
exploitation.

Condoms in Schools
Yes because...
Condoms are one of the most effective means of protecting against STDs, HIV and pregnancy. For thei...
Condoms are one of the most effective means of protecting against STDs, HIV and pregnancy. For their cost, they are easily the most cost-effective
means of protecting against these threats.
No because...
The effectiveness of condoms is grossly exaggerated. If not used properly, condoms can be highly ineffective. Young people are more likely to use
condoms incorrectly, due to lack of experience with them or because they are drunk. Moreover, the temptation to have sex without a condom may be
significant where the supply of condoms is not plentiful.

Opinions on distribution of condoms in primary and secondary schools


Is it proper for government to enhance condom distribution exercise in schools?

The issue of sex education has long been a controversial one. The two basic types of sex education in the Malawi are abstinence-only and
comprehensive. While comprehensive education advocates abstinence as the primary defence against unwanted pregnancy, sexually transmitted
diseases (STDs), and HIV/AIDS, it also addresses the inevitability that some adolescents have or will engage in sexual behaviour. Providing
information about contraception and how to have safer sex is an integral part of comprehensive sex education. Providing condoms in schools is a
much debated aspect of some comprehensive programs. In contrast, abstinence-only programs discuss abstinence, or refraining from sex until
marriage, as the only guarantee of protection from the growing epidemics of teenage pregnancy, STDs, and HIV/AIDS. Some schools and parents
are afraid to give student's condoms out of fear that it will push them to engage in sex before they are ready. Condoms play a key role in preventing
HIV infection around the world. In sub-Saharan Africa, most countries have seen an increase in condom use in recent years. Even when condoms
are available, though, there are still a number of social, cultural and practical factors that may prevent people from using them. In the context of
stable partnerships where pregnancy is desired, or where it may be difficult for one partner to suddenly suggest condom use, this option may not be
practical. Thengo Kavinya asked several people their opinion:

>>The need to reduce the risk of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease for those who decide to have sexual relations requires less
divisiveness. Parents can still instruct their children as they see fit, but parents and their elected representatives should entrust school boards with
the power to supplement that instruction with informed, health-based programs and services, including condom distribution programs. The principal
message teens should receive is that their continued health and safety is key.

>>Providing condoms to students in public education programs will reduce the incidence of underage pregnancy and the spread of sexually
transmitted diseases. If one accepts the premise that condoms are an effective means of prevention, it stands to reason that their distribution could
have a significant impact. Condoms are one of the most effective means of protecting against STDs, HIV and pregnancy. For their cost, they are
easily the most cost-effective means of protecting against these threats.

>>It is best to have students abstain 100 percent, its a fact that youths are already exposed to dangers through early sex and that condoms would be
of service. Providing students with condoms actually encourages the earlier onset of sexual activity. If young people believe they will be safe when
using a condom they are much less likely to be deterred from engaging in dangerous and immoral behaviour.

>>Widespread condom distribution will establish sexual activity as the norm among young teens, creating peer pressure to participate in sex. The
added temptation to engage in sexual activity that is protected will result in more women having sex at a younger age, perhaps furthering their
exploitation.

>>I feel condoms does not increase sexual activity but can decrease unintended pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and HIV. So I feel In the
interest of public health, restrictions and barriers to condom use should be removed. Condom distribution cannot increase sexual activity.

>>Sex education program including condom provision accepts the inevitability of adolescent sex and encourages students to make wise, safe
decisions if they do have sex. It is a wise investment by the government to supply condoms for schools in that it is very expensive to address
problems created by irresponsible sexual behaviors.

>>When the school tries to substitute the family as the shaper of personal values, it weakens the authority of the family. If the school weakens the
family, it will contribute more to the increase of venereal disease and unwedded motherhood among teenagers than it can counteract by distributing
condoms.

Should condoms be distributed at school?


YES:
1. Prevention is better than cure. This would help in decreasing STDs and teenage pregnancy. However as it might seem to be extreme at the same
time it's more likely to contribute in fighting against unwanted pregnancy and HIV. THIS DOES NOT IN ANY WAY ENCOURAGE SCHOOL
CHILDREN TO ENGAGE THEMSELVES IN SEXUAL ACTIBITIES BUT SERVES AS A REMINDER THAT PROTECTION IS IMPORTANT.
2. Yes off-course they should! I am strongly support this issue! Yes i do believe that every students nowadays have had already engaging sex
intercourse , i think some are missing the point, Our DOH proposed to give out condoms to every high school students, but it doesn't mean that they
are tolerating the sex in our society, the point is, they just want to avoid the STD's that continuously spreading through sex intercourse, and also they
just want to minimize or to control the number of population now in our society that continuously growing rapidly
3. Yes off-course they should! I am strongly support this issue! Yes i do believe that every students nowadays have had already engaging sex
intercourse , i think some are missing the point, Our DOH proposed to give out condoms to every high school students, but it doesn't mean that they
are tolerating the sex in our society, the point is, they just want to avoid the STD's that continuously spreading through sex intercourse, and also they
just want to minimize or to control the number of population now in our society that continuously growing rapidly
4. Yes off-course they should! I am strongly support this issue! Yes i do believe that every students nowadays have had already engaging sex
intercourse , i think some are missing the point, Our DOH proposed to give out condoms to every high school students, but it doesn't mean that they
are tolerating the sex in our society, the point is, they just want to avoid the STD's that continuously spreading through sex intercourse, and also they
just want to minimize or to control the number of population now in our society that continuously growing rapidly
5. Accept the truth We can't deny that most of the students nowadays are already engaged on sexual activity, that's why our government were
initiating a solution to prevent teenage pregnancy and the spreading of HIV and AIDS among the youth. It doesn't mean that you should engage on
sexual activity after receiving condoms, it is just for emergency; and the government would not distribute condoms just like giving candies, it has a
process for the students to understand and be disciplined. For those who oppose, did you ever think of a better solution to these? Well, I don't think
so. The main purpose of these was to save more lives and preserve the morality of the young ones.
No.
1. Not in school Giving condoms to kid in school is just supporting them to have sex. First of all, if a school is considering this, how many pregnant
students do you have in that school? If you have a lot then obviously your not teaching health class correctly. Second of all its just a stupid idea all
together. If the kid is stupid enough to have sex then that's there fault for not using a condemn.
2. I do not think so..!! I stringently oppose the subject. I would like you to answer some questions below for their respective countries as the consent
differ from country to country -
Q1) What is the age of the children when they pass the high school?
Q2) What is the legal age for sexual activities?
Q3) Is there any need of condoms at such age?

In my country, student generally pass the high school at 17 and legal age for consent is 18. Therefore, there is no point in distributing condoms in
schools.
3. Stupidity at it's finest. If the government have set a law, stick to it. If the age of consent is 16 and over in the UK, why are the government
equpping school children for underage sex? As a teenager myself, not proud to be I shall add, I know that other teenagers will try and outdo
eachother to share their pathetic sexual encounters with the rest of the year group. People in authority and the media verge on paedophilic by
pressuring young people so much to have sex. They are further perpetuating this notion of underage sex by subtextally saying "everybody is doing
it? Why can't you?". Who cares what everybody else is doing? What if you don't have those pathetic urges at that age? Then what? You'll be subject
to being called "frigid" if you're female and "loser" or "gay" if you're male. Now with the argument of underage pregnancies and STDs. Hypothetically
speaking, if underage people didn't have access to contraception and got an STD or an unwanted pregnancy, clearly it's their own damn fault. They
should have applied their knowledge of this to their own common sense. If you do something illegal, they shouldn't expect that their won't be
consequences.
4. That would be quite contradictory, wouldn't it? Schools teach against underage sexual activity! And by giving out condoms in school that would just
be supporting it. Plus, if someone doesn't want to use a condom, just because their school provides it doesn't mean they're necessarily going to take
use of it. When anyone decides to participate in such acts it is their responsibility to use protection or not, the only thing schools should do is teach
the circumstances of these actions.
5. Interest in sex In learning we say that the teachers role is to spark interest in the learner, students will not participate unless they have someone to
introduce them to the activity, therefore I feel that introducing condoms in the school acts as a medium through which students are made aware of
sex. The thought pattern shifts and more focus is put on the latest trend that is sex. Since everyone is doing it, why shouldnt I. This one action of
bringing condoms in schools brings about a string of events that eventually lead to pregnancies and stds aka a chain rxn.

Condom conservatism should loosen


Despite the fact that Rwanda imports over 13 million condoms annually (PSI statistics), there is a huge reluctance by high school authorities to let
students carry the life saving rubbers to school.
In other words, all these millions of condoms are not meant to be used by the students while they are at school because the headmasters believe
that condoms will promote promiscuity.
This also would imply that, students are not supposed to protect themselves from contracting HIV or having unplanned pregnancies.
There is some sort of a paradox in this whole issue, which to me shouldnt even be in the simplest case complex. The country is currently vigorously
promoting condom use in all the villages and districts, university students even carry out personal initiative to go in groups to villages and
demonstrate to the rural population how a condom must be used.
While all this happens, a high school student whose luggage is found to be hiding just one condom will face expulsion from the school and total
humiliation.
He will be called all sorts of names, a bad influence to the rest of the students, as well as be assumed to be taking drugs.
With over 150,000 people living with HIV/AIDS in Rwanda, there must be a rethink on this whole practice if we dont want the numbers to increase.
The most important people of our future are educated students. So every effort must be directed towards their safety and survival.
As a young man, I remember my days at high school as the wildest stage of my life. I hit 13 and all my adrenaline and testosterone doubled in
figures. After endeavoring to get good grades, the rest of my adolescent life was bent on impressing the girls.
I would witness the more active teenagers sneak out to have a moment with each other. Some of them would later be expelled for dark cornering
activities.
All I hope for now is that they had sneaked in condoms instead of putting their lives at risk by having unprotected sex.
I would assume that the head-teachers would spearhead the fight against AIDS by urging their students to carry condoms to school instead of
sticking with human conservatism.
Am sure every society would wish to preach abstinence first. But the fact is that abstinence works best for people who are religious, or people who
uphold their morals and have a higher degree of self restraint.
People are not all the same. We dont fight the same way and everybody needs different solutions to their problems. For that reason, condoms were
invented to save people who would rather not abstain. Students also have a right to choose the best option to protect them from the AIDS pandemic.
The reason why young artists like Tom Close are put up on billboards to promote condom use is because the governments acknowledges that
sexual relationships in the youth are as real as a beggar squatting by the roadside.
Its therefore an illusion for head-teachers to assume that sex on campus wont happen if students are prevented from carrying condoms.
The truth is, students will go on and have sex no matter how strict the supervision is. As a matter of fact, they will be forced to engage in unprotected
sex and put their lives at risk.