Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Contraception for under-age girls
Section H. Health, science and technology

Most countries have an ’age of consent’ for sex of 16 or 18, under which it is illegal for young people to engage in sexual activity. In spite of this, many such jurisdictions will make contraceptives available, sometimes even free, to girls under the age of 16. This debate questions whether that juxtaposition makes sense. The objectives of policy in this area are, on the one hand, to prevent teenage pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs); and, on the other hand, to preserve young people’s opportunities to live their lives free from the pressures and potential harms of sexual activity.

Pros

[1] Young people will experiment with sex regardless of what the state, their doctor or anyone else says. In recent years, teen pregnancy has been rising dramatically in many countries. There has also been an increase in STDs. The relative difficulty of access to free contraception is one of the most obvious reasons for this. If we know that young people will have sex anyway, we should do whatever we can to make sure that it is as safe as possible.

[2] Young women should be given the information and resources to stand up for themselves and make informed choices. Not all parents are able or willing to give their daughters these resources. Contraception must be just one facet of a comprehensive sexual health and education programme, encompassing schools and society at large. Research suggests that such programmes delay sexual activity rather than promoting it.

[3] Children should not be kept ignorant and in the dark about sex, and then be expected suddenly to be ’grown up’ when they hit 16. Delaying problems is no substitute for solving them. Parents often find it difficult to raise issues of sex with their children — and yet under 5 per cent of parents opt out of optional sex education lessons for their children. Far from fighting against sex education, parents are crying out for it.

Cons

[1] If it is illegal for an under-age girl to have sex, it should surely be illegal for anybody to aid and abet her in that activity. Moreover, the apparent official sanctioning of such behaviour can only encourage it. This is not just about the enforcement of Victorian-era morality. There are very sound policy reasons for under-age sex to be prohibited. First of all, if it is with an older person, there is a serious risk of emotional manipulation, such that real consent is absent. But even with parties of the same age, young people may not be ready for the emotional consequences of sex.

[2] We should not be encouraging young people to have sex at an early age. Contraception is far from being 100 per cent effective, and failure can lead to unwanted pregnancy and/or STDs. Most contraception, even if effective, cannot prevent sexually transmitted diseases; in all cases, it is not certain that transmission will be prevented. Our resources would be better targeted at discouraging under-age sexual intercourse.

[3] Children already have to cope with a barrage of sexual images from a multitude of sources (pop videos, magazines, films, the Internet); the state should not be joining in the assault. It is parents who should be empowered to provide a moral framework for their children, rather than doctors or the government.

Possible motions

This House would make contraception freely available.

This House believes that if you are old enough to be having sex, then you are old enough to use contraception.

Related topics

Sex education

Parents, responsibility for the criminal acts of their children