WP: More Women Opting Against Birth Control, Study Finds

[kskiska]

Tuesday, January 4, 2005; Page A01

At a time when the medical community has been heartened by a decline in risky sexual behavior by teenagers, a different problem has crept up: More adult women are forgoing birth control, a trend that has experts puzzled -- and alarmed about a potential rise in unintended pregnancies.

Buried in the government's latest in-depth analysis of contraceptive use was the finding that the number of women who had sex in the previous three months but did not use birth control rose from 5.2 percent in 1995 to 7.4 percent in 2002. That means that as many as 11 percent of all women are at risk of unintended pregnancy at some point during their childbearing years (ages 15 to 44).

Researchers at the National Center for Health Statistics took pains to point out that the "increase is statistically significant" and that the "apparent change merits further study." Other analysts called the spike a troubling development that translates into at least 4.6 million sexually active women at risk of conceiving a child they had not planned on.

Because the survey is so large (more than 7,600 women) and known for its accuracy, "an increase of even two percentage points is worrisome," said John S. Santelli, a professor of population and family health at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University. Even as he cheered the news that a growing number of teenagers are using contraception, Santelli wondered whether doctors are neglecting women.

"Maybe we're failing with women over 21," Santelli said.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45599-2005Jan3.html

[SoCalDem]

1. Maybe women over 21 have read enough to understand

that the "prime real estate" of fertility is between 20 and 26.

Perhaps the younger women have watched their older sisters and Moms spend tens of thousands of dollars trying fertility treatments, and they have decided that "que sera, sera"..


Or perhaps this is just another "bullshit" study:)

[YDogg]

2. I opt for ...

... bullshizzit. w00t!

[Maat]

4. Well, to a woman, none of MY friends have had trouble ..

conceiving while in their 30's, and I, for one, would drather see women wait until they are mature enough to raise a child with love, and enjoy every minute of that.

I was blessed with my daughter near 40. I know that I'm a better mom now than I would have been had I gave birth to a child between 20 and 26. I'm more financially stable, and can afford to meet her every need.

DUers, please do not encourage young 20-year-olds (or younger) to be having children. Generally speaking, they just are not as mature or financially stable. This retired social worker encourages people in their 20's to use birth control.

Just an opinion. Flame away!

[SoCalDem]

5. I'm not encouraging them, but ya gotta admit

that the TEE-VEE has been hitting this fertility problem issue for many years now..

And the scare tactics used regarding the side effects of BC have been in the news and magazines a lot too..

Perhaps the dismal job outlook plays here too.. If you can only fins a shitty part time job, and are putting off family for that, having kids now may not look too bad as a trade off..

I'm not "approving" ANY action..just trying to figure out the "why" of it..

and then again..

It might just be another "bullshit" survey :hi:

[Maat]

8. I get it, SoCalDem,and 'Hi!'

I just get so frustrated with people thinking have kids is some kind of thing that 'God' wants you to do, without thinking. Sorry. Didn't mean to antagonize. I'm just remember the abused, neglected and abandoned children I helped. Wish certain women would not tie their self-worth to having children, believing that this defines them as 'successful women.' What ever happened to getting an education?

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

11. All of the twenty somethings I know are just as

mature in terms of being responsible as anyone who is in their 30's or older. Twenty somethings are a lot different than teenagers. I wouldn't discourage someone from having a child based on their age, unless they happened to still be in high school (or worse, junior high).

I gave birth to my son when I was 23 (currently 25), and I think I was plenty mature enough to have him at that age. I had already gotten my bachelor's degree by then. I actually felt older at 23 then I do now. I worked so hard in college that I felt like I was 40 by the time I graduated.

Personally, I'm glad I won't be spending my forties raising children. I'm glad to be doing it now when I'm young, healthy, and energetic. I hope to be healthy and energetic when I'm older, but who knows what the future holds.

To each their own.. anyhow. It's just a matter of personal preference.

[SemperEadem]

19. same here

I had my only child--a daughter--when I was 23... she's 21 now and I get to go out and play again, after having fulfilled my legal duties as her parent and guardian. It's great enjoying her as an adult while I'm still young enough to 'hang' with her, in a sense.

tell ya what's weird--going out and having a drink with her...

[truthseeker1]

28. How can you possibly have the perspective at age 25

to say you or anyone else you know in their twenties is mature enough? Please.

[theboss]

65. My mom was 21, a college grad, and married when she had me

I don't think it's a black/white issue.

[truthseeker1]

66. My mom was 16 when she had my brother and 20 when she had me

that's beside the point. The person I was responding to is 25 saying she had a baby at 23, and stated she feels she is mature enough. How can anyone who's still in their twenties have enough perspective to be able to weigh in? I'm absolutely not saying women in their twenties shouldn't have babies. I think it's a personal decision and depends on the person, but I don't believe you can really say if you were mature enough at 23 when you don't have any more distance from it than just two years....when she's 35, 40, 45....yes.

[jdj]

79. I do think that if a young woman has it together enough it is

great to have a child, if that is what you want.

There is a certain sadness to having a child later on in that you suddenly start doing the math and going, wow, I won't be here to see my grandkids grow up, and if I am, I will be possibly not that mobile and healthy.

I think gen X was really the first generation to devour careers and run like hell from the lives of our parents, most of whom were raised traditionally. Even most of the boomers had their kids young. Maybe this generation wants to do both.

This generation is the one where girls are enrolling in college at a slightly higher rate...the playing field has been leveled a little. My work life has been such a tremendous struggle for equity that I just can't imagine doing it with a child in tow.

But the truth is that there are trade-offs no matter what choices people make. Maybe the 25 yr. old will look back and think she was less mature than she thought, maybe she won't. Truthfully, though, that won't matter, because she's living NOW, she has the child NOW, it isn't going to make any difference.

[abelenkpe]

31. I was a wild irresponsible kid

in my twenties. So personally I am glad to have waited to have a baby. However, you are right. Not everyone is the same. If one is ready financially and emotionally to have a baby then who is to say what is the proper age?

[Dulcinea]

35. So was I.

I was in no way ready for parenthood in my 20s. I had my first daughter at 36 & the second one at 38 (no trouble getting PG!), & that was definitely the right decision for me. I've done my partying, don't feel like I'm missing anything, & am definitely much more responsible & patient now. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but I'm glad I did it this way.

Seeing all the responses on this thread, the key is FREEDOM OF CHOICE. We MUST keep it that way!

[atommom]

62. I had my kids in my 30s, too, and am really glad that I did it that

way. Having kids younger may work out fine for people who are ready. What concerns me are the young women who aren't ready or willing to reproduce, and still aren't using BC.

[Maat]

68. I agree with the following poster so much ...

abelenkpe, Dulcinea, atommom, truthseeker1. There should be choices. And a different thing is right for each person. But my choice wasn't a bad one. It was the right one for me. And since I 'dopted, my daughter and I came together at just the right time. I 'gave rebirth' to a 2-year-old at 40.

Now, that being said, I can have a mid-life crisis at 46. My 8-year-old understands. I'm getting politically/socially involved. My 8-year-old just plays with the ducks in the park, while I protest/rally with the others at the local duck pond. I think she thinks it's boring.

[amazona]

59. I'm more wild and irrresponsible in my 40s

Mid-life crisis anyone?

[Maat]

69. Yep. I'm on board, believe it or not.

My 8-year-old is just laughing watching me have one. I feel 23! I'm getting involved in my favorite political/community orgs. I feel great! Think my 8-year-old is more interesting in us getting a sports car, rather than social consciousness.

[annabanana]

36. the whole continuum may look a little different to you

from , say, your 50's...

[HockeyMom]

39. No

I am 56 and had my kids when I was 30 and 35. I had an ectopic 3 years after the first and even with only one tube had my daughter 2 years later at the "old" age of 35. I didn't even get MARRIED until I was almost 26. Are these young women, who are having babies so young, getting married that early too? That also must be mean they are probably foregoing an education.

Personally, from my own experience I think having kids later keeps YOU YOUNG. My sister-in-law had her kids in her late teens and early 20s. Even though she isn't out of her 50s yet, she has been an empty nester for a LONG time now and ACTS like an OLD WOMAN.

Don't RUSH things.

[annabanana]

40. I was agreeing with you, HockyMom...

The post I was answering was written by a 25 year old who believes she was plenty old at 23 to start her family. MY kids were born when I was 36 and 39. (For me, a good choice)

[janx]

54. No, most young women graduate from college with

a B.A. at 21 or 22. Or they can continue their studies after having children.

So they have plenty of time to get the degree. I have as many degrees as I have kids, and I had my last one at 30.

So to each her own. It's exhausting any way you look at it. ;-)

[Samurai_Writer]

49. I had my first child at 17...

who was placed for adoption. I had my second child at 20. I'm now 44, my youngest has been grown and on his own for the past 4 years. I raised my second son on my own, although with some help from my parents when I went back to college when I was 24. It CAN be done, and this crap about 'not being mature' enough is just that, crap. Everyone is an individual. My sister, who is 43, has two adopted girls who are 4 and 2. I could not fathom having toddlers running around at this point of my life. She does tell me they do tire her out more than she ever expected -- and this is the sister who is a marathon runner and long-distance skier. Yes, she has more money and can provide more 'things'. But she doesn't have the energy that I had when my son was younger. It's all a trade-off, whether you have your kids at a young age or at an older age.

As for this study, I'd say most young women can't AFFORD birth control in this economy. Not everyone has access to Planned Parenthood, you know.

[Cats Against Frist]

20. I'm with you

I had my son at 26, and even though I love him, and wouldn't backtrack for anything, if I could have planned it out, perfectly, I would have wanted to wait for about two more years.

I wouldn't encourage ANYONE in their early 20s or younger to have children. Why? Because your early and middle twenties are some of the best goddamn times of your life -- old enough to be independent, and still independent enough not to have any obligations.

I have just turned 30, and I regret not living out my early 20s to their fullest potential -- and I did a pretty bang-up job of having romance, adventure, fun and excitement, but I will never have that opportunity again. I've accepted it, and moved onto a new phase -- a wonderful phase, too, with my son, but now that I'm 30, I can start doing that "I know better than you," routine to the young 'uns. :)

[phylny]

41. I had my first at 27,

next at 30, last at 33. We were married four years before we started our family, and I am glad we had that time together.

My husband is always talking to our girls about the benefits of being a little bit older when you have your kids.

[thinkingwoman]

46. I had my first child at 22

as did my mother and grandmother.

It's funny how perceptions change over the generations.

My grandmother was considered an old old maid and possibly barren.

My mother was also looked at funny for "waiting so long."

I was gawked at like I was a teenage mother!

I firmly believe that women's bodies are meant to bear children in their 20s and, pushing 40 now, I'm happy my kids are teens and that I will be the youngest empty nester around (except for my even younger husband of course!).

Maturity has nothing to do with age. I've seen 40 year olds that should never be parents. I've seen teens who could handle it just fine. I believe you when you say that for you, almost 40 was the right age. But for me, 22 and 25 was the just right time.

[janx]

57. That's so true.

I had my kids when I was a few years older than you were, but a lot of other mothers I saw with kids my age gawked at me. Some of them had gray hair.

The kids and I struggled together, but I'll *never* regret it.

And on the other hand, I have a good friend who just bore twins at the age of 46. She and her husband married about ten years ago and tried for a long time to have children.

The twins came about a month early but are adjusting well. The parents, on the other hand, did not expect such an adjustment. I know they will be fine; they'll be great parents, but they honestly admit that the lifestyle change, after so many years of freedom, was a tough one.

My private theory is that we all have just so much time and energy for child rearing. Eventually, that energy runs out, no matter what our age. My friends have only just begun to spend their energy.

[gaia_gardener]

71. Aw shoot, I had my first at 25

and had lots of gray hair. But, I do have a young face. I've gotten the strange looks and usually felt really young around other women in the city. When I went back to my semi-rural hometown, I was "old".

[noshenanigans]

56. thank you

Thanks for encouraging people- I am a 25 year old woman who has seen two cousins have children while they were still in high school. Both now life right on the poverty line and have an incredibly hard life ahead of them.

My older sister is having a baby (her due date was two days ago, so it's coming really soon) and she's 30. They planned the pregnancy, and this child is coming into a loving, warm, prepared household. The difference is astounding.

[knitter4democracy]

78. I had to start trying young

I have endometriosis, and the odds weren't that great for me to be able to have children, so after the third doctor said, "You are trying to conceive, aren't you?", my husband and I decided, as young as we were, to start trying. Well, I ended up getting preggers in a year (average for under 30 is 3-5 yrs to ttc, over 30 is 5-7 yrs), and I had my second child after a year of trying as well. So I had mine at 26 and 28, younger than I had originally planned, but that was what I had to deal with.

For what it's worth, I'm not on birth control anymore--Hubby got snipped! ;)

[jdj]

12. well. it looks like they especially want an UNPLANNED pregnancy

since that is what they are aiming for.

Maybe they are relying on the possibility of abortion.

Good luck with that one, young uns.

[ElectroPrincess]

52. There's two sides to every story ...

I was on a full dose of the pill for 15 years. At ll years into my present marriage of 22 years, I informed my husband, "I you want to have a baby, let's do it now before I get any older."

I only provide testimonial evidence but I found it quaint that all sorts of Doctors and Nurses warned me, "You'll probably NEVER get pregnant having been on The Pill so long and being So Old.

Guess what? I was pregnant for the first time two months off The pill at the age of 35.

I wonder if this "aging stuff" has been studied systematically among healthy women not to mention said infertility after taking the pill?

Seems like a big scare tactic to lower the economic standard of women. We would NOT have wasted a cent on an infertility clinic, but instead, would have purchased "a boat" or something. LOL Not cruel but if the parental demand was still strong we would not have hesitated to adopt. Bet a lot of infertile couples lament that fertility is wasted on people like me.

Therefore, I'm encouraging my daughter NOT to have a Baby before the age of 27 or no later than the age of 30. IMHO a college educated woman is only receiving their Bachelor's degree at 23 y.o. and needs to get a few years in the work place to establish them self before the demands of child care. Why? So women can maintain their economic standard of living with or without their Mrs. Degree. ;)

[shrike]

61. I don't have children, but ...

In my experience, the women who have children young look at older moms and say, "What, are they crazy?" And those having kids later are glad they waited. It all seems to be a matter of perspective.

This article disturbs me -- why would any sexually active woman forego birth control beyond the obvious? And they seem to include single as well as married women -- why would an unattached woman play Russian roulette with her body?

[atommom]

64. I think the media has overhyped the "declining fertility" thing.

For most women, getting pregnant after 30 is not a problem. After 40, it may be more difficult.... and there will always be a subset of women of all ages who need medical help to conceive.

[NashVegas]

3. Wondering

The study didn't look at whether there was a corresponding rise in pregnancies, especially unwanted pregnancies. I'd think that kind of important.

[rodeodance]

47. Wonder if they asked if they used the 'morning-after-pill"?

[Tace]

6. Could It Be That They Want To Have Children?

[susanna]

10. LOL - that was my first thought.

Maybe they're ready now and want to try?

edited for sarcasm gone bad

[EC]

7. Have they gone up in price?

Has there been funding at Planned Parenthood etc.? or is that all cut off now?

[Spacemom]

9. Maybe it's becoming more difficult

to obtain birth control??

Pharmacists are refusing to fill the prescriptions and insurance companies are refusing to cover the cost. :eyes:

[jdj]

13. "Babies are the new puppies."

I swear, people, I actually heard an entertainment reporter say this on some show the other day. Pregnancy and marrying young are now a trend.

[Undercover Owl]

29. puppies

The way some women are taking fertility drugs, their amount of fetuses per pregnancy can increase to the point where they may as well call it a "litter".

(Sorry, that's kind of crass, huh)

[jdj]

80. LOL

how true, and then they have to go through the process where they cull the less viable fetuses.

But abortion is an unforgivable offense.

[bpilgrim]

14. don't they mean 'opting OUT of'?

how the hell can you opt AGAINST birth controll unless you're one of those rw fundy activist :crazy:

peace

[SemperEadem]

15. I wonder if their partners know that they are not using bc

that would suck if that were the case. and it's not as if they're too young to know better.

And are these married women, or single women being this irresponsible? I certainly hope they've at least discussed it with their partners before engaging in intercourse.

[ElectroPrincess]

53. I wonder also IF "their partners" every make it a point to ask?

I know that most women aways ask their boyfriends this essential question. Opps! Hum? ... I guess it's the responsibility of the individual woman to make sure she's protected. The more things change ... LOL

[daleo]

16. I would hope this would have been age standardized

If not, it may just reflect aging of the population. As the mean age goes up (even when restricting the population of interest to childbearing years), it would not be a surprise that women would be a little less likely to use artificial birth control - the average natural fertility would be going down as well. The two may counterbalance so that there would not necessarily be an increase in unwanted pregnancies.

[Stunster]

17. Did this study control for the possibility

that more women are trying out 'natural family planning'?

[gaia_gardener]

24. I wondered that myself

I've done some reading on NFP and don't feel disciplined enough to fully trust it, but I know lots of women that are using it successfully. I do follow my body's signs just as a "isn't that interesting" sort of thing, though. The human body is so cool.

A good study, though, would have included that as an option of birth control.

[phylny]

42. It's possible.

An acquaintance of mine and her husband are using NFP. She became pregnant when her first baby was 7 months old, and unfortunately miscarried. Second pregnancy has come now, and her baby is 11 months old.

Suffice it to say that I don't think much of the method (pun intended, naturally!) I can't imagine having kids that close together, but who am I to say?

[jdj]

18. When you read pg. 2 it says it's money and lack of insurance.

"It is possible, said Paul Blumenthal, that many more women are trying to conceive and thus have stopped using contraception. But the Johns Hopkins University professor said it is more likely that more women have found the cost of birth control burdensome.

"Because the number of uninsured has increased, these women might be on the short end of that stick," he said. Since 2001, the number of uninsured Americans has risen by 4 million. "

It's 2.2 percent of women doing this, and at the same time it is not clear whether the women who didn't use bc didn't do so because their partner wore a condom.
It says they interviewed the women about the partner's behavior but it's not clear if this affected the percentage.

Also, 50% drop in Planned Parenthood Funding since '87. Yikes!

But Title X "is nowhere near keeping up with inflation," said Susanne Martinez, vice president of public policy at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Adjusted for inflation, the program's 2003 budget was 57 percent smaller than it was in 1980, she said. In addition, Title X dollars are now spent on a broader range of services, such as testing for sexually transmitted diseases.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

21. I still think that that even poor and/or uninsured women

can easily get birth control if they want it. There are plenty of doctors that will give out birth control pills for free (samples). If you tell them money is an issue they will try to help you out. Planned Parenthood has very affordable prices on a variety of birth control methods.

The pills I prefer are not carried by the local planned parenthood (mini pills) and my insurance doesn't cover birth control, so I pay full price for them. I get the generic brand (Errin), and it costs me about $35 a month. Maybe that seems like a lot, but it is at least half the price of the brand name pills (Ortho-Micronor).

[gaia_gardener]

26. That's all well and good if you can even afford to

go to the doctor. There have been times when paying the $25 copay was too much and I'm one of the lucky ones that have health insurance. Without health insurance it can be $50-150 for a doctor's visit. And the doctors I've been to won't (can't?) lower that fee.

I know that a lot of doctors end up throwing away samples because they don't think to give them away (which I so don't get). I always ask for samples of my allergy meds when I visit the doctor - no matter what (or who) I'm there for. I can't afford the prescription price (and consequently end up using OTC meds that don't work nearly as well), so I rely on those samples, but I'm someone who isn't too shy to ask.

[pookieblue]

50. Many years ago- when I was working for Min Wage

I couldn't afford to go to a doctor, RX's, etc.

But women were able to go to the Health Department to their healthcare and get Birthcontrol pills. They would go according to your income, so some wouldn't have to pay a dime, others would only have to pay I think twenty bucks for a 1/2 years supply of pills.

Of course this was when Clinton was Prez... there is no telling how it is with Bush in office.

[jdj]

76. yes, you cain't get nuthin at the health dept. no more

they've gone from basically free when I was around 18-20 to now using a graduated scale, the last time I tried to get health care at my local hd they WOULD NOT even give me an estimate for services or even a ball park. I was told I would have to come in on the day of my appt (for which I would wait at least a month) and then fill out a form and they would calculate the amount I would owe based on my rent and my salary (which was 8 bucks/hr at 35 hrs a week or so) and I said "what happens if I get down there and what you say I can afford is more than what I can pay, or what I have on me" and they refused to answer me. They would not work with me at all, so I couldn't go because I only had $100 to put toward this and they said it was very possible it would be more than that.

The hd here says your fee is based on the income of everyone in your household.

But I have to say, the truth is, young women need to use condoms. Oops excuse me, this study is about older women, but we need to use condoms as well.

[phylny]

43. Sorry to hear that your insurance doesn't cover birth control

- not that I'm surprised, I don't think mine ever did, but I used a diaphragm back in the day.

Find out if your insurance covers Viagra, and if it does, ask why Viagra and not BCP?

I never understood not covering at least part of it. It's vastly cheaper than paying for prenatal care, and then the healthcare of the children.

[RayOfHope]

51. That's assuming

One lives near a Planned Parenthood. The nearest PP clinic to me is 2 hours away. I don't have prescription coverage on my health insurance (self insured) because it's too expensive. I can't get pills at the local health department either.

So no, it's not that easy.

[amazona]

60. this is not true any longer

Wyeth and other makers of the birth control pills have GREATLY reduced the amount of free samples they will provide to ob/gyns and clinics. Some pills, they won't provide ANY free samples.

I discussed this with two different ob/gyns, and they both agreed that there has been a real clampdown on samples.

[NMDemDist2]

22. perhaps with the STD's around they are using condoms more

rather than hormonal BC

that has up and down sides, but may be a reason

[gaia_gardener]

27. Wouldn't that have been listed

as a type of birth control? I can't access the article, but I would assume they would consider all mainstream methods of birth control - hormonal, condom, sponge, diaphragm, etc.

[Book Lover]

23. When am I going to see this story:

More Men Opting For Birth Control
"Male Pill" Gaining Acceptance Quickly After FDA Approval

[Kool Kitty]

25. Good question.

Don't hold your breath waiting for that one....

[abelenkpe]

30. I recently opted against birth control

but that's because I'm trying to have a baby. No news here!

[PowerToThePeople]

32. yup

The last two gals I have been with were both in their mid twenties and both don't use birth control. Silly thing is, they both have children and their first one was unplanned. They seem VERY responsible in other aspects of their lives but this baffles me completely. Neither one uses any social support systems, but they still risk another pregnancy. Strange. They claim that it messes with their thought proccess, which I wouldn't doubt the hormones could make your brain work "differently" but still, to risk another pregancy???

edit- Can't wait till they come up with a good "man" b-control pill.

[annabanana]

37. "messes with their THOUGHT PROCESSES?"

If they're running around without social support systems, having unprotected sex, I'd say their thought processes are messed enough!

edited to say:

Welcome to DU! :toast:

edited again to say:
If you were "with" them...you were having unprotected sex too... so LOOK OUT!

[gaia_gardener]

72. I can't take hormonal birth control

I can't explain exactly what it does to me, but I'm just "off". I'm just not me. When I started having spotting issues and breakthrough bleeding, it seemed like a good time to say it just won't work for *me*.

We use other methods of BC (which must work since our youngest is 4 and we have a healthy sex life).

[knitter4democracy]

81. Me neither

It turned me into a serious b****. I'm lucky my hubby married me at all, since they put me on it for my endometriosis a year before we got married. I was even on the lowest dose. So we used a combination of barrier methods and natural family planning, and that worked fine. Now I have nothing to worry about since Hubby got snipped. We're both seriously done after two kids. ;)

[ThoughtCriminal]

33. I'm just glad I raised my children before the Bush economy

I'd be screwed if I had to start today.

[LeftyMom]

34. Unless they're counting NFP as contraception

I think that's a part of the phenomenon. I've been an NFPer for 3 years and I've noticed that popularity and awareness seem to have gone up in that time. Also, I hear a lot less of the old "NFP=rythym" confusion.

[R Hickey]

38. I know a girl who had her first kid at 14, and everything turned out fine.

She never went to college, but her boy did, and was a straight A student. She reciently helped him buy a house. She has had two kids since then, she's currently about 40, and they're all doing great.

Last year I met an Amish man who was my age, 56, and we did some comparing. I've had no kids, he'd had 14. I have no grandchildren, he has somewhere between 50 and 100.

I can't remember how many grandkids he said he had, because when he told me, the number was so big, it completely boggled my mind.

[phylny]

44. Different variation on that story.

I know a girl who had her first baby at 14, and she's now a runaway at 16. Left the baby and her home, she's out with her boyfriend somewhere, most likely not using birth control, and will probably have another baby before the end of her 17th year. Will come back when pregnant, have the baby, dump him or her on Grandma, and run away again.

Sigh.

[gaia_gardener]

73. And I know a girl that had a baby at 15

did go on to college. Is now going for her masters. Her son is 17 and is an honor's student with offers of full-ride scholarships to several private colleges.

For all her faults, she was always an incredible mother. She now has 4 children by 3 men - 2 of whom she was/is married to.

But she was the exception. 3 of her friends also had babies that year. All 3 dropped out of HS, 2 married the fathers. Those 2 are still married but have gone through a lot of counseling, they eventually went on to get their GREs and associate's degrees. I have no idea what happened to the other, she moved away.

I wouldn't have made her choices (and in fact, her example was a lot of what kept me celibate through HS), but it did work for her.

[jdj]

77. wonder how many of his grandkids he fathered?

I'm so sick of these incestous religious cults treating women like breeding machines/sex slaves.

How did he support them all, prey tell?

And by the way, HE didn't have 14 kids, his WIFE did.

[hippywife]

45. Another aspect they fail to mention is

that once a woman hits age 35, their GYN is less likely to prescribe birth control pills due to the increased possibility of stroke, especially if she is a smoker.

[foo_bar]

48. a consequence of "abstinence education"?

Since sex is a foregone conclusion, it seems intuitive that the trend in denying sex education would produce precisely this result.

[demnan]

55. Well if birth control were covered by health insurance

it would be as affordable as Viagra. I have nothing more to say.

[amazona]

58. it's price, pure and simple

If the cost of my birth control pills are $500 a year, which it is, and the cost of a termination is less than that, which it is if I get to the clinic in time, and at my advanced age it would be difficult for me to get PG every year...well...you do the math.

The high price of the Pill means that using early PG tests and early termination as birth control can be the more intelligent choice based just on mathematics. The side effects may be less too.

If so-called pro-lifers are concerned about the number of women relying on termination for birth control, they need to do something about making sure all insurance plans cover the PIll and they also need to raise an outcry about extortionate cost of the Pill. This is an old drug, an old technology. The price-gouging has got to go. Otherwise, I'm not sure why MORE women over 35, when fertility declines, don't play birth control roulette.

[wovenpaint]

63. You make an interesting point

And, if all birth control methods are now on the "hit list" for the "Pro-lifers(until birth)", then why the HELL is Viagara covered by insurance and in vitro fertilization not in the crosshairs also?!?

Every chance I get, I ask pharmacists WHY Viagara is covered by insurance and birth control pills are invariably not. The look on their faces is priceless- and if there are other customers in earshot, it can cause a stir...hehehe

[amazona]

67. keep creating a stir...it does help

I finally got a new plan that does cover the Pill so my days of birth control roulette are over, or at least they are as long as this contract lasts. But I know it was precisely this issue -- women complaining that Viagra and Cialis were covered and Birth Control wasn't -- that got it added to this year's plan.

[shrike]

70. $500? Holy crap!

My husband is sterile, so I don't bother with that stuff anymore. But $500 -- Jeez Louise, maybe I'm hopelessly behind the times, but that sounds like a lot of money.

[amazona]

74. the price has gone through the roof

You wouldn't think with such an old technology it could be so expensive. In Mexico, at least in Veracruz state, low dose BC Pills are over the counter for the equivalent of a few bucks, and the same drug company makes them and still manages to turn a profit. It really kind of makes me mad. One time the price went up twice in two months.

[bleedingheart]

75. Or...like me...they had the husband "fixed"...

that way we don't worry and he doesn't mark his territory anymore..

:evilgrin:

[knitter4democracy]

82. Hear, Hear!

Me too. No worries here!