SINGAPORE: Risky sex, such as not using contraceptives, is gaining ground among younger couples in Singapore.
This is according to a survey on "Sex and Contraception" by the Singapore Planned Parenthood Association.
It was conducted from July to November 2010, on 1,800 Singaporeans, aged 15 to 66 years.
The study showed that seven in 10 Singaporeans believe in sex before marriage.
And they’re getting younger.
In 1999, only three per cent of those aged 12 to 21 years have had sex.
But in 2010, 24 per cent, aged nine to 15, have done so.
And 46 per cent of those aged 15 to 20, have also tried it.
What’s also worrying is that of the 29 female respondents below age 16, half cited the risky withdrawal method as their preferred choice.
Findings showed that of the 356 women who’ve had sex, one in three believed this method works effectively in preventing unwanted pregnancies.
And of those who use contraceptives (229), a quarter (25 per cent) practise the withdrawal method.
Dr Christopher Ng, a consultant obstetricial & gynaecologist, said: "The attitudes among young people in Singapore are changing, and if that is going to happen, the message should be responsible contraception, as opposed to having intercourse without contraception, and then ending up with unplanned pregnancies and then having a high abortion rate."
Experts said the withdrawal method does not prevent the risk of unwanted pregnancy and does not protect women against Sexually Transmitted Diseases.
They said inconvenience has been cited as a reason for not using contraceptives.
They added that most still use condoms and they’re urging the use of pills.
Dr Ng added that women’s actual practice in using contraceptives did not match their knowledge about the reliability of the methods.
Four in 10 women said they would be comfortable to talk about contraception if they had better education in school, or someone they can confide in.
Vice—president of Singapore Planned Parenthood Association Edward Ong said: "Getting the right information is so important, even the use for example of the contraceptives, whether it is a condom, a pill, and all the various other methods. Because from when we have counselling sessions, and when we give talks, the questions we get indicate that they are not getting the right information, or even the use of these things."
Besides urging parents to take a more active stance in their children’s sex education, Mr Ong said schools must also help young people make informed choices.
— CNA/ck
.
So, despite an expanded sex ed programme in 2001, teens are worse off in practising safe sex.
One hates to imagine what will happen since abstinence and other conservative sex ed programs begun to be introduced this year.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
Well if your not teaching them the right things properly then what would you expect ?
According to the study... you should be giving out sex ed courses as early as 8 or 9 and access to contraception at that age.
However... I somehow doubt your sexually active nine year old is going out and get pills which the article points out on top of wether or not it is convinient to do so.
Additionally... the women have been taught about the reliability but not how to actually use them. Sounds to me like the sex ed courses are classroom theory where a teacher lists off stuff and gives statistics... then just drops it because its uncomfortable.
Here is an dilema: Do you want your teachers to be showing nine year olds how to use birth control in practice with 'hands-on' approach ?
That does bring up an interesting issue. How does one teach, or sell the use of contraceptives, to people who are committing statutory rape.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
PainRack wrote:That does bring up an interesting issue. How does one teach, or sell the use of contraceptives, to people who are committing statutory rape.
Especially without causing massive whiplash of accusations of child rape, peadophiles running rampant.
I suppose the only way to fix it is to change the law... so its not statutory rape.... which is just frightning on it's own for the shit that would cause.
By this article you would have to lower it to 9 or somehow make it possible for those individuals to gain access to the education and resources. I'm sure many teachers will happily show nine year olds how to put on condoms and pills without turning it into a colossal bag of uncomfortable awkwardness.
I suppose you could lower it to 12 but no matter how you cut it... anyone who dares suggest this kinda thing is going to get crucified and thus it will be stuck to DONT do it because thats alot easier.
"But in 2010, 24 per cent, aged nine to 15, have done so."
If they're lumping everyone between the ages of nine and fifteen into the same survey demographic... doesn't it seem more likely that 24% of 14-year-old Singaporeans are having sex, than that a significant number of Singaporean nine-year-olds have? The fact that nine-year-olds are included in the survey doesn't mean there are enough of them having sex that you should tune your policy to concentrate on them.
Worry more about the 12 and 13-year-olds, they're a lot more likely to have actually reached puberty.
What’s also worrying is that of the 29 female respondents below age 16, half cited the risky withdrawal method as their preferred choice.
OK now I'm no statistician or sociologist or whatever, but that strikes me as a pretty tiny sample size. Too small to draw any conclusions from.
WRT statuatory rape etc, I think the best solution would be to have variable ages of consent. So two 13-year-olds doing it, that's OK (under the law), but an adult would still be committing rape. But I think it's a sensitive enough issue (and seriously who wants to think about kids having sex) that such things will never get passed into law.
But is that really an issue? I mean I remember getting sex education classes at around 13/14 years old. We were also taught about alcohol and drugs (along the lines of 'don't do drugs kids, but if you are then definitely don't inject anything, and definitely don't buy stuff from some guy at a rave') before it was legal to drink. Giving them the contraceptives, I can see how that would be difficult (anyone could just pick up condoms from the local youth centre where I lived, but I don't know if that would be acceptable in Singapore).
And also one of the ingredients to making a pony is cocaine. -Darth Fanboy.
evilsoup wrote:WRT statuatory rape etc, I think the best solution would be to have variable ages of consent. So two 13-year-olds doing it, that's OK (under the law), but an adult would still be committing rape. But I think it's a sensitive enough issue (and seriously who wants to think about kids having sex) that such things will never get passed into law.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that's the law as it is here in Australia/Tasmania. Age of consent is between 16 and 18 for most states in Australia, but from age 12, it's not considered statutory rape if the two participants are within two years of age of each other, i.e. a 14 year old and a 16 year old, a 12 year old and a 13 year old, etc. I mean, sure, I wouldn't want my kids having sex at 12 or 13, but neither should be branded a criminal if they're both under the legal age of consent and within a year or two of age with each other, imo.
Yeah that's my reasoning too. I thought I vaguely remembered that being the case somewhere in the world. But it seems like quite a difficult thing to get passed into law, and not really something most politicians would want to dedicate too much time to.
How long has that been the case in Tasmania? Or has it always been that way?
And also one of the ingredients to making a pony is cocaine. -Darth Fanboy.
I'm not sure how long that's been the case here. But Canada has something similar, called a "close-in-age exception". http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/200 ... -bill.html And Finland apparently has a similar exception in its age of consent laws, allowing people beneath the age of consent to have sex without being labeled a criminal if they're close in age.
SilverWingedSeraph wrote:from age 12, it's not considered statutory rape if the two participants are within two years of age of each other, i.e. a 14 year old and a 16 year old, a 12 year old and a 13 year old, etc.
It's three years of difference between the ages of 12-14, five years for 15 and 16 year olds. I don't know the Criminal Codes of other States off hand, but that's what it is in Tasmania.
Whilst I am not sure if there is anything official in the UK laws on the matter, I have heard that it's not penalised as much if the couple is about the same age.
Although, in a bizarre twist, if the guy is uner the age of consent and the girl is over it, the guy is sstill counted as raping the girl. Weird.
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."
Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
The total response is only 356 and its an online survey..........
On second thoughts, storm in a teacup.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
