Login/Sign Up




Should public high schools offer free contraception to student?
Other

rebirth
Feb 03, 2010
16 votes
9 debaters
4
2
2
1
1
1


+ Add Argument

9
Yes


cloudburst2000
Feb 03, 2010
3 convinced
Rebuttal
Okay, I'm a bit conflicted on this argument, but I will go with yes. My support comes from the belief that free contraceptives will not encourage students to have sex. If they want to have sex, they will do so anyway. At least now, they will be prepared. Many parents out there STILL don't discuss sex with their children. That's why schools got involved in the first place...because parents were shirking their duties. SOMEONE has to tell young people about sex and the possible consequences of being sexually-active. I can tell you that growing up my sex education ALL came from school and from TV. Neither of my parents ever said a word about it. I knew about the dangers involved from STDs etc from my sex-ed class and from the media (I grew up when AIDS was first becoming well known in the 80s). If many parents STILL don't talk with their kids about sex, you can be sure that if their kids are sexually-active (which most are) that they are not providing them with any type of contraceptives. You must remember that most students in high school are not fully mature yet. They often still have much growing-up to do. Therefore, they don't always make the best decisions. I knew plenty of people back when I was in school who did not practice safe sex because they didn't have the means to get contraceptives. Yes, I know that most local health departments offer them for free, but if you have no means of transportation to get there, then you can't take advantage of their free offerings. Yes, they could buy them. Again, many students don't have any money to buy them with. If they were offered free at schools, then the students would have a free supply in a location that they visited 5 days a week during the school year. Most of the people I knew in school practiced unsafe sex if they didn't have access to contraceptives. I remember several girls throughout my high school years who became pregnant because they didn't use any type of contraceptive. If they had been available for free, I think our school would have seen fewer pregnancies. Free contraceptives don't encourage students to have sex, but they do encourage students to have SAFE sex. Many young people will have sex regardless if they have access to contraceptives. Giving them contraceptives doesn't encourage promiscious behavior, but hopefully, it will encourage them to put on a condom BEFORE sleep with someone.

 
teachme
Feb 05, 2010
2 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: rebirth Show

Why would the government have to distribute condoms? I feel they should simply be made available, without cost to the students. When all is said and done...it costs governments way more money dealing with unwanted pregnancies and overpopulation...along with the repercussions. Providing condoms to students is a cost-effective preventative measure.

 
cloudburst2000
Feb 03, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: rebirth Show

My main problem with this argument is that some students don't have transportation to get to anywhere that they can purchase condoms. There are still alot of students out there that don't have access to cars, and if a person lives in a rural area (and most of the US is rural), then how is that person supposed to be able to get to a store to purchase contraceptives. Like I said, the local health departments often have free contraceptives, but I've known students who didn't take advantage of it because they had no way to even get there. The same argument can be made for convenience stores. I doubt that the school bus will stop at a convenience store so Joe Blow can run in and buy some condoms. If the school wants to make condoms available but perhaps charge for them if you can pay but free for people who can't, I have no problem with that. And also, when you come from a poor family $0.60 is alot of money. I'd say that most of the girls in my school who got pregnant were from poor families. They likely couldn't even afford $0.60 for one condom. And trust me, not only the poor girls were having sex. I think some of the girls who had cash actually did buy contraceptives, but it takes money.

 
processing
Feb 07, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Not an arguement I even considered but makes perfect sense. Making them available at no cost is significantly better than a mass distribution and alternative costs of dealing with pregnancies and STD's. I was going to vote on the other side until I read this one.

 
maycillia
Feb 11, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
The thing is, that many teenagers are going to have sex whether they learn sex-ed in school, or even from their parents. It's just part of the teenage rebellion. Abstinence cannot be the only thing that is taught at school, because then teens that do have sex may not know the consequences of unsafe intercourse. Sure, it would be spectacular if all teens practiced abstinence, but in reality, that just is not going to happen. So by showing them that there is safe ways to have sex, even though it is not advised, and by further providing them with contraceptives, maybe there will be a reduction in the number of teenage pregnancies our generation is faced with. I mean, come on people lets face it, when they start making a show about it on MTV, that's when you know there's a problem.

 
pitbullmommy
Feb 15, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I think they should. Here's the reasoning why, look at these two situations and figure out which you'd prefer.

15 year old daughter comes to you and says "My boyfriend and I had sex and I'm pregnant."
or
You find out your 15 year old daughter is having sex but is being safe and isn't pregnant with stds.

We would all love to think that kids these days aren't having sex but facts prove that they are whether they tell their parents or not. I know their are some abstinent kids out their too though.

All I'm saying is you may not want your kids having sex but would you rather have a pregnant child who had sex or a child who has been smart about having sex and using pre-cautions?

 
+ Add Argument

7
No


christine
Feb 03, 2010
2 convinced
Rebuttal
As part of education, all the information should be made available to all students. Totally open and frank discussions about sex, STDs, pregnancies and responsibilities. After they have all of the information the students will then make informed decisions.

 
armitage
Feb 03, 2010
1 convinced
Rebuttal
I agree with full information being taught but not to full supply. I don't believe they will have sex just because of free condoms but they do need to know what they are agreeing to

 
rebirth
Feb 03, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
One condom is not very expensive, but hundreds of millions of condoms are. Any student is able to purchase a condom for under a dollar, but for a government to distribute condoms to all students (most of which don't engage in sexual activity) will be very expensive.

 
jessie33
Feb 03, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: cloudburst2000 Show

I agree .... Parents and children even in this day and age still do not feel comfortable talking about sex. Education should be taught at home but that's not always the case. I feel that if adolescents had access to contraceptives they would take safer measures.

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

electroshock therapy abortion america animals Art baby battle Bush comics convinceme Death debate debates Dog economics ect ethics evil faceoff Fight gender global warming God health history humans internet Iran Iraq Islam Jesus love management marijuana men money music peace people philosophy politics pollution President psychology religion religon Sex society Spirituality suicide technology terrorism the us vancam vs War Women world Yes