Editorial: No excuse for the high STD rate of American girls
Thursday, March 13, 2008; 12:00 AM
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that one in four teenage girls in the U.S. has at least one sexually transmitted disease.

Fifteen percent have more than one. The most common disease found was human papillomavirus.

Considering the resources available to teenagers, this number is way too high. The primary option for preventing STDs, abstinence aside, is the use of a condom, and yet so many teens aren't using them. A study by Child Trends in 2005 revealed that only 63 percent of high school students use a condom when having sex.

There is no excuse for not using a condom; a twelve-pack of condoms at CVS costs about $13. It costs around $100 to freeze off genital warts and more than $100 to buy one tube of Aldera, a cream that treats genital warts. If you are in a steady relationship and are splitting the cost of the condoms, then using a condom is even more financially intelligent, in addition to the safest choice. Condoms are even available at Schiffert Health Center if you don't want to make the trek to CVS, and coupons are available to buy two dozen of them for $5.

Another resource for women is the HPV vaccine, Gardasil. The efficacy of the vaccine is reported to be 100 percent for preventing disease from the four main types of HPV. Virginia is considering creating legislation that would make the vaccine mandatory for girls in middle school, and if the vaccine proves to be effective, then it is an efficient step toward further sexual safety.

Unfortunately, some students are uninformed about STD prevention in high school. The fact of the matter is that abstinence isn't a reality for youths, and as students continue to have sex, education needs to be shifted from abstinence-only education to preventative education that includes information on barrier methods.

What the research does not acknowledge is the statistics for males. It does not make sense that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention did not look into the STD rate for both genders, since STDs can passed from men to women and vice versa.

Both genders are responsible for safe sex. It is recommended that women be tested annually for diseases, but it is not currently "necessary" for the men to do the same. While a cause for the high rate of STDs in women is the fact that some aren't tested regularly, increased testing for both genders would significantly prevent the spread of diseases between sexual partners. It is important that anyone who is sexually active schedule annual check-ups with a doctor to check for diseases.

Sexually transmitted diseases are not just warts; many diseases can be fatal to the recipient. There is no excuse for the high number of girls with an STD. Preventative measures need to be taken to keep yourself and your partner safe.

The editorial board is composed of Amie Steele, Joe Kendall, Saria Haider, Laurel Colella and Saira Mitchell.

You might be interested in... Related Topics:
Posted by: lisa oot at Mar 31 I teach s-x education in schools, and believe me, the kids need it! Peer education has been proven to be the most effective way of presenting information to students. A majority of young people will not listen to their parents, even if parents tried to talk to them about s-x. But the fact is, most parents would rather have their child watch horrific violence rather than talk to them about s-x. I agree that parents are an extremely important part of a child's education, however, they simply are not getting it done when it comes to it. Did you know that there are 14 steps to putting on a condom? Most parents will not sit their child down and teach them how to use one, especially the girls. The government needs to get involved in s-x education as this is NOT an individual problem!! It is a matter of public health and is a problem for our whole society. It is absolutely ridiculous to think that s-x education is not needed in schools, and we need to start in the middle schools. Prevention is best when it IS prevention. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at Mar 17 Where are the statistics on teenage boys? Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jason T at Mar 13 To the anonymous poster: are we supposed to pat teenagers on the back as long as the majority don't have an STD? Wake up and realize that it is alarming how many teenaged girls are making decisions that lead them to contract an STD. It's just plain nonsensical to argue that we should wait until a majority have it to address it as a problem. Maybe part of the problem is constantly giving this generation awards for doing what should be expected. "Good job, Suzie! You didn't contract an STD and you got straight C's. Keep up the good work." Also, as a side note, restroom condoms that claim to be contraceptives must pass the same FDA standards as name brands, and if teenagers can get something illegal like alcohol, I'm sure they can figure out a way to get condoms without discomfort. Adults have a responsibility to tell children the consequences, but beyond that, it is the child's responsibility to analyze the risk and make a decision. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at Mar 13 First of all, don't mess with statistics. 65% is not an "only" number. It's well above the majority and indicates that there are in fact far more teenage girls who don't have STDs compared to those that do. Secondly, you have to look at the situation through their eyes. Imagine how uncomfortable it must be for a 15-year-old to walk up to a convenience store clerk with a pack of condoms. Yes, you can buy them in restrooms, but those are expensive and probably not very good compared to name brands. As for education, the reason education isn't effective is because: 1. The more you talk down to teenagers and kids, the more they start to tune it out. This is especially true when scare tactics and other "ends justify the means" strategies are used on them. 2. Authority figures such as parents and teachers giving warnings about sęx only turns it into forbidden fruit: it becomes that much more attractive. Adolescence and post-adolescence is a time of rebellion for many, and if you constantly rant on about something being dangerous, that only encourages the behavior. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jonathan Daugherty at Mar 13 Amen to that, Chip! Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jonathan Daugherty at Mar 13 Thanks for the compliment Mike. I don't see anywhere in my comment a reference to religion or even to morals, but I'll accept that as a compliment anyway. I merely feel that a kids' s-xual education should be the responsibility of their parents, whether or not they take that responsibility seriously or not is up to them. It is not the job of the government to protect us from every bad decision we make, nor is it the government’s job to teach as amoral a subject that most feel has moral implications. I would argue that a study like the one discussed in the article points out the flaws in the current comprehensive teaching. I was not arguing for abstinence only education, I was arguing for no education. As Kyle pointed out, the information is out there. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out a condom, one can put one on without having practiced on a banana. If we expect these kids to be responsible enough to have s-x, we probably should expect them to be responsible enough to learn about the consequences. If you find something specifically wrong (illogical) with my first comment, please point it out. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Chip at Mar 13 I just have to laugh that in a university newspaper posters have to write s-x during this serious discussion so as not to have their postings deleted. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Oh Please at Mar 13 Abstinence aside? Ha. Let's go ahead and dismiss out of hand the only effective and responsible way to address the issue. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Kyle Minor at Mar 13 I never asserted anything regarding trends or data. My point is one of rhetorical relevance - if kinds are reponsible enough for s-x, then they ought to be considered responsible enough to find the information for themselves. Given that there are so many and varied opinions regarding s-xual morality in society today, and given that these beliefs are among the most closely held of certain segments of the population, it seems logical to assert that s-x education ought to be eliminated from schools entirely. Like I said, the information is out there, and it isn't really very difficult to find. You show me where that constitutes an 'old motra of a moral crusader.' Flag Abuse
Posted by: J.B. at Mar 13 Jonathan and Kyle, you both need to check your facts. I've done the research and most data indicates that children today are getting more attention than the children of the previous generation. It's also worth noting that according to peer reviewed research, teenage s-xual activity has decreased over the past 50 years. By comparison to the teenagers in the 20s, our teenage youth is very tame. Other research has shown time and again that a comprehensive approach to teaching s-x in schools is more effective than abstinence only at preventing disease and ensuring psychological health. It's irresponsible to make these broad generalizations. Before you trot out old matras of moral crusaders, be sure to check your facts or none of your arguments will hold up. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Kyle Minor at Mar 13 This is the very reason why it is inappropriate to teach s-xual education in schools. Different people have different moral standards - some parents prefer their children learn from an abstinence-only perspective (certainly a healthy perspective in its own right), while other parents perhaps encourage s-xual exploration in one manner or another (which in itself is not biologically prima facie harmful, although there are psychological consequences as well). Unfortunately, many parents simply don't care about their children at all, and consequently children of such irresponsible adults are 'left to their own devices' and this is where your problems lie. It's not a question of likelihoods of s-xual activity among certain segments of the teenage population - it is equally irresponsible to assert that "all of them are just going to do it anyway" as it is to assert that "If we just taught abstinence-only, the problem will go away." The most appropriate way to handle this topic is to simply tell children that resources are available to help them with their decisions, and let them handle it from there with the assistance of their parents. It seems to me, in large part, that comprehensive s-x education tends to assert that society has no faith that children will exercise restraint when it comes to their hormones, and as a result the programs tend to come across sounding like "We pretty much expect that you'll give it a shot, so here's what you need to do to not get a disease." This attaches an implicit social stigmata to those children who DO exercise restraint, and tacitly implies permission to children who don't feel it necessary to exercise restraint. The information is out there, available for anyone who wants it (regardless, in most cases, of age). If we, as a society, want to assert that teenagers are responsible enough for s-x, then we ought also be prepared to assert that those same teenagers are responsible for educating themselves as to the risks and consequences of s-x. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at Mar 13 Jonathan Daugherty - you need to read the studies and articles examining teenage sxual activity. This article was well written. Abstinence-only education is out-dated and it is people like you that keep safe-methods and barrier-methods from being taught. This article was not insulting to common sense. But I do agree Where are the parents? I think maybe they should take part in teaching their children how to protect themselves. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jonathan Daugherty at Mar 13 There's also no excuse for the promotion of promiscuity and the poor parenting that goes on out there. "They're going to do it anyway" is a pretty lame excuse for handing out condoms to kids who have no ability to handle the physical or emotional consequences of s-xual activity. Maybe the results of this study should highlight the need to reduce that activity among youth and stop looking the other way when they make bad choices. The only foolproof method of preventing STDs is to abstain from s-x. It is utterly foolish to believe that condoms and “education” are going to solve this problem. More parents should beat sense into their children and teach them that not everyone is doing it, that you don’t need it for a steady relationship, and that it’s dangerous to sleep with every person you date, emotionally and physically. Once again, the CT editorial board has written something very insulting to common sense. Way to go with the prevailing winds CT board, let’s not stand up and say “wait a minute, maybe these 13 year olds (15, 17, etc) are not really old enough to understand the consequences of their actions. Where are the parents?” Let’s just have the government schools hand them some condoms and pamphlets and hope they make the right decision. Flag Abuse
Add your opinion
Copyright © 2008 Educational Media Company at Virginia Tech Inc. All rights reserved.
about | advertising | archive | contact | print edition | headline emails | join us | subscribe
All stories, photos etc. produced by the Collegiate Times are property of the Educational Media Company at Virginia Tech. No information may be republished without the expressed written consent of the editor of the Collegiate Times.
» Virginia Tech
» VT webmail
 » VT People Search
» My VT / Hokie Spa
 » VT Blackboard
» gmail