Government Abstinence Web Site Draws Ire

By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON ? How should you talk to your children about sex? Tell them no sex, says a new government Web site that proclaims "abstinence is the healthiest choice." That's dictating values, say organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union and gay rights groups, and they want the site taken down.

Michael Leavitt, secretary of the Health and Human Services Department, says the Web site is right on target.

The site was designed for parents who are embarrassed about talking with their children about sex, Leavitt said in a statement.

"Parents have a tremendous amount of influence on their children and we want them to talk with their teens about abstinence so that they can stay safe and healthy," he said.

Promoting abstinence is fine, said Monica Rodriguez of the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, but the government should also address the needs of teenagers who are already sexually active, gay or lesbian, or who have been sexually abused.

For example, she said Thursday, the site should promote the proper use of contraceptives, and it should not imply that homosexuality is wrong by encouraging parents of gay or lesbian children to consult a therapist.

"By and large, it's a Web site that believes in abstinence until marriage," said Rodriguez, whose advocacy group promotes comprehensive sexual education. "Everything on the Web site is designed to promote that value and help parents communicate that value to their children."

Her 41-year-old organization as well as the ACLU, the National Education Association and more than 100 other advocacy groups are asking HHS to take down the Web site.

Bill Pierce, an HHS spokesman, said he was not surprised certain groups dislike the site.

"They've always opposed us on the issue of abstinence. That's fine," Pierce said. "One thing we do know about abstinence is that if you practice it, you will not have an unintended pregnancy or risk catching a sexually transmitted disease."

The site advises parents to tell their teens why they should not have sex: "Tell them abstinence is the healthiest choice. They will not have to worry about getting pregnant or getting someone pregnant. They will not have to worry about sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS. Nor will they have to worry that the person they are dating is only interested in them because of sex. "

And it paints a bleak picture for teens who get pregnant: "Many teen mothers never finish high school. Teen mothers and their babies are more likely to have health problems. And families started by teen mothers are more likely to be poor and end up on welfare."

For parents of teenagers already having sex, there is a section on contraception.

But Rodriguez said that section promotes unsafe sex rather than safe sex.

The site describes condoms as imperfect, saying they can break or be used incorrectly, and it includes a chart of whether a condom protects a little, some, or a lot, against various sexually transmitted diseases.

"There's this misconception that giving young people negative information about contraception will encourage them not to have sexual intercourse, when all it will do is encourage them not to have contraception, so the strategy backfires," Rodriguez said.

Patrick Fagan, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said the Web site's information about condoms looked accurate.

"This is standard, straightforward research on the effectiveness of condoms," he said.

The groups protesting the Web site also contend it is biased against gays and lesbians.

The site says: "If you believe your adolescent may be gay, or is experiencing difficulties with gender identity or sexual orientation issues, consider seeing a family therapist who shares your values to clarify and work through these issues."

Rodriguez said the Web site's definition for homosexuality -- "a person who prefers sexual contact with people of the same sex" -- implied that being gay was a sexual preference rather than a sexual orientation.

"There's no information whatsoever for their parents other than to go talk to a therapist," she said.

Fagan, though, said the Web site would be useful for parents of gays and lesbians.

"Teenagers involved in homosexual acts ... are worth the same transmission of information on the effectiveness of condoms and on the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases," he said.

HHS' sex talk site: http://www.4parents.gov

Kristof : Memo to Bush: Condoms don?t kill, AIDS does

Nicholas Kristof THE NEW YORK TIMES

LIVINGSTONE, Zambia - Sex kills all the time, particularly here in Africa. But prudishness can be just as lethal. President Bush is focusing his program against AIDS in Africa on sexual abstinence and marital fidelity, relegating condoms to a distant third. It?s the kind of well-meaning policy that bubbles up out of a White House prayer meeting but that will mean a lot of unnecessary deaths on the ground in Africa. The stark reality here is that what kills young women here is often not promiscuity, but marriage. Indeed, just about the deadliest thing a woman in southern Africa can do is get married. Take Kero Sibanda, a woman I met in a village in Zimbabwe. Sibanda is an educated woman and lovely English-speaker who married a man who could find a job only in another city. She suspected that he had a girlfriend there, but he would return to the village every couple of months to visit her. ??I asked him to use a condom,?? she said, ??but he refused. There was nothing I could do.?? He died two years ago, apparently of AIDS. Now Sibanda worries that she and her beautiful 2-year-old daughter, Amanda, have HIV as well. Encouraging more use of male and female condoms might reduce such tragedies, for there?s a disdain for condoms in many countries that social marketing might change (there?s an African saying: ??Who wants a sweet with the wrapper still on???). The fact is that condoms have played a crucial role in the campaigns against AIDS that have been relatively successful, from Thailand?s ??100 percent condom program?? to the efforts in Uganda, Cambodia and Senegal. And condoms don?t cause sex any more than umbrellas cause rain. In theory, everybody agrees on how to prevent AIDS: the ABC method, which stands for abstinence, being faithful and condoms. But the Bush administration interprets this as ABc. New administration guidelines stipulate that U.S.-financed AIDS programs for young people must focus on abstinence or, for those who are already sexually active, ??returning to abstinence.?? Here in Livingstone, Zambia, I visited Corridors of Hope, a U.S.-financed center for young people that has proved cheap and effective in reducing HIV among prostitutes and long-distance truck drivers. One prostitute in the program is Mavis Sitwala, an orphan (probably because of AIDS) who is supporting her five siblings and one child. She says that truck drivers pay $1 for sex with a condom or $4 for sex without. ??At times, you need food or money to pay the rent,?? she said, ??and so even if he won?t use a condom, you agree.?? Encouraging Sitwala to ??return to abstinence?? isn?t likely to get far, but encouraging more use of condoms might save her life, the lives of her clients and the lives of her clients? wives. Indeed, the Bush administration recognizes that, allowing condoms to be handed out to prostitutes in programs like Corridors of Hope - but not to society as a whole. There?s a bit of wiggle room in the administration guidelines. But the U.S. Center for Health and Gender Equity reports that in several countries, the U.S. is already backing away from effective programs that involve condoms. The irony is that Bush?s plan to tackle AIDS in Africa - spending far more than any previous administration - could be one of his best and most important legacies. It tackles one of the most important humanitarian challenges in the world today: At present infection rates in Zimbabwe, 85 percent of today?s 15-year-olds will die of AIDS. So I wish Bush would reach out beyond the ideologues to a real expert, like Loveness Sibanda. I met Sibanda (no relation to the other Sibanda) and her child in her village in Zimbabwe. She is 26, and her husband works in the city of Bulawayo, where she has heard that he has a girlfriend. Every few months he comes back to the village and insists on sleeping with her, without a condom. She now dreads these visits. Perhaps the White House thinks it has the moral high ground when it preaches, completely irrelevantly, to women like Sibanda about the need to be faithful. But it strikes me as hypocritical to pontificate about virtue while pursuing an ideological squeamishness about condoms that risks condemning Sibanda and million like her to die of AIDS.

Condoms, pregnancy test kits recalled

Condoms, pregnancy test kits recalled
Associated Press
March 25, 2005
WASHINGTON ? Condoms and home pregnancy test kits sold in retail stores nationwide are being recalled by their distributor, Harmony Brands, because they may not work correctly.

The Oak Park, Mich., company said Friday it is recalling Lover brand latex condoms and B-Sure brand one-step home pregnancy test kits. Both products were sold nationally in various retail outlets including dollar stores and convenience stores.
Harmony Brands said consumers who have these unused products should return them to the place of purchase for a refund. The company said it has not received any consumer reports of failure of the products but was initiating the recall because the Food and Drug Administration said the safety and efficacy of the items could not be assured.

CONDOM DEPOT DOES NOT SELL THESE PRODUCTS

California lawmaker calls for condoms in prisons

Wednesday, March 02, 2005- The Advocate
California lawmaker calls for condoms in prisons
California assemblyman Paul Koretz last week introduced a bill that would permit nonprofit and public health care organizations to distribute condoms in state prisons to help reduce HIV and sexually transmitted disease transmissions. Condoms are currently permitted only in Los Angeles County and San Francisco County jails in the state. "The HIV infection rate in our state correctional facilities is many times higher than in the general population," said Koretz in a press statement announcing the introduction of the legislation. "Everyone knows that sex happens in prison, and the correctional system seems unable to prevent it. Ignoring that fact by not distributing condoms results in unnecessary inmate infections and fuels HIV transmission outside of prison, particularly in our minority communities."

California prisons house more than 160,000 individuals who are at high risk of contracting HIV, according to state officials. The rate of HIV infection in California's prison system in 1994 was estimated to be 2.5%--eight times higher than the rate in the general population of Los Angeles County in 2000.

"Public health agencies could find no more effective place to distribute condoms than in prisons. Not doing so is taking a huge toll in additional infections and in health care costs to state programs," says Koretz. The Correctional HIV Consortium estimates that the health care cost for an HIV-positive inmate is $80,396 per year. Former inmates who became infected in prison often end up on MediCal or in the state's AIDS Drug Assistance Program. In the 2002-2003 fiscal year, the average annual treatment cost for an HIV-positive MediCal client was $22,964, according to Koretz's office. The average annual cost for a client in ADAP was $7,966 in the 2003-2004 fiscal year.