Northern California, Second Graders, and Oral Sex...

Yes, if you are shaking your head at the title of this post, then you are not alone. As I read through the article that I found on Yahoo earlier, and which forms the basis for this post, I was shaking my head too and wondering how it is that this sort of behaviour can happen.

The story originates out of Markham Elementary School in Oakland. The principal was forced to notify parents that a teacher was placed on leave while the school investigates claims that students were not only disruptive in class, but had in fact stripped off and engaged in sexual acts, oral sex to be precise. Preliminary investigations by the school indicate that the complaints have merit and warrant even further investigation.

According to the school, "We believe if the reports are true, there was a serious lapse of judgment or lack of supervision in the classroom." The school then went on to say "We're investigating how could this have happened. It seems unthinkable to us, just the same way it does to the public." Do you think?

The male teacher claims that he was unaware of any of the alleged acts and has stated unequivocally that he did not witness anything that has so far been suggested. Yet, as a teacher, I find it difficult to believe that if he was present in the classroom as he is required to be, then it is pretty hard not to witness children getting their gear off and engaging in sex acts, particularly when these children are in the second grade.

More disturbing is how children of 7, 8 or perhaps 9 years of age are aware of this kind of behaviour. Personally, I cannot recall when I became aware of oral sex, but I am absolutely certain I was not thinking about it in the second grade. As I recall, I did not even get the benefit of sex education, or as it was called at the time "personal development" class, until I was in Year 9 (Ninth Grade).

The school maintains that it is doing everything in its power to ensure that this does not happen again. The school has also offered counselling and any other assistance required to help those children who were involved.

I am still shaking my head. How does something like this happen on seemingly such a large scale in a classroom?

The mind boggles.

"No Baby" Campaign...

If this is not an advertisement for finding an effective way to provide sexual health and reproduction lessons in school, then it is hard to work out exactly what would be. In one Memphis, Tennessee, high school there have been 86 teenage pregnancies within the last 12 months. Some of those young women, 15 - 19-years-old have given birth and the others will soon do so. Reports suggest that Frayser High School is not extraordinary as the rate of teenage pregnancy in the area where Frayser High School is located is currently running at 26%.

The mind boggles as I really cannot get my head around the idea of more than a quarter of the girls being pregnant. This is particularly so when I think back to my high school days where it would have been hard to find 25% of the student population that was sexually active let alone a quarter of the girls being pregnant.

A "No Baby" seems to be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. Nevertheless, a response of some kind has to be made in order to attempt to arrest the continuing increase in teenage pregnancy numbers.

The thrust of the campaign is teaching girls that it is alright for them to say no to sex. The overriding theme of the program is to develop the confidence of young woman and to empower them to make decisions by educating them to their rights. The program, from what I can tell, is also educating these young women about pregnancy and the challenges it will pose to them now and in the future. The program is also designed to ensure that these young woman are well-educated to the best practices of pre and post-natal care.

The scope of the problem facing the Memphis area school system is obvious when one looks at overall US statistics relating to teenage pregnancy. The data from 2009 states that the national average for 15 - 19 year-olds is 39 births per 1000 girls. However, this rate is much higher than the numbers in Western Europe. In Australia, the numbers are pretty low, but they are rising. This rise is attributed to a decline in the quality and frequency of these issues being discussed and taught in the classroom environment.

It is unclear whether the lower numbers in Western Europe and Australia are attributable to better education or just better teenage awareness of contraception and pregnancy. In Australia, at least in NSW, the responsibility for teaching students about sexual health falls under the curriculum of the Personal Development, Health and Physical Education (PDHPE) framework.

PDHPE is not my area of expertise. To be honest I have only looked at the curriculum sparingly. I have only looked at one text book on the subject, the one used by Cootamundra High School. To my uneducated self, there seems to be more than enough in the curriculum and the textbook to get the job done.

My personal view is that it is critical that we arm our children with all of the tools necessary to allow them to make informed decisions about what they want to do and how they want to do it. It is important that we encourage our children to be responsible and to take responsibility. Therefore, I am in favour of ratcheting-up the time that is spent on the teaching of sexual health / personal development in the classroom. The reality, as I see it, is that it would be remiss not to try.

I have a good few years yet before I will have to be sitting young Will down for the inevitable birds and the bees talk...

Virginity: A Minority of Indonesian Youths...

A recent survey by the National Population and Family Planning Board (Badan Kependudukan dan Keluarga Berencana Nasional / BKKBN) of Indonesia has turned up some interesting results about the number of Indonesian youths engaging in pre-marital sex. The survey was conducted in 2010 and the results are the best indication yet of the state of play for Indonesian teenagers.

The survey results show that 51% of those teenagers surveyed in the greater Jakarta area of Jakarta, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi (Jabodetabek) admit to having engaged in pre-marital sexual relations. This is important data to consider, especially with World AIDS Day about to take place tomorrow, 1 December 2010. The data is also important as a tool for legislators and teachers. There is an explicit and urgent need for personal development and personal health education, sex education if you will, to be incorporated into school curriculum throughout Indonesia.

The fact that there are some who would argue that sex education will only encourage children to be sexually active are really burying their collective heads in the sand. The data shows that without sex education our children are engaging in sexual activity in ever-increasing numbers. Therefore, it makes sense to ensure that our children have access to, and learn about, the most up-to-date information on sex. It is time that some people began to realise that sex education is more than getting out the old cucumber and rolling on a condom, and then saying "OK children, that is how it is done! Alrighty, back to maths!"

Outside of the Jabodetabek Surabaya is leading the way at 54%, Medan is at 52%, and Bandung is at just 47%. The survey results also indicate that more than a third of sexually active females are experiencing a pregnancy before marriage. Abortion is illegal in Indonesia except where there is a legitimate medical reason for a doctor to perform an abortion. Therefore, with such a large rate of pre-marital pregnancy prevalent in the community the risk of these youths go to backyard abortion hacks is real.

The data suggests that of the 2.4 million abortions performed in Indonesia annually, some 800,000 of these are performed on teenagers with an unwanted pregnancy. Therefore, there are good reasons for the government to consider the results of these surveys from not only an educational perspective but a public health one too.

Unfortunately, any suggestion that the government get involved is likely to be interpreted as a need to legislate morality. The chance therefore is that the government will try to criminalise pre-marital sex in more ways than one cares to poke a stick at while simultaneously committing greater resources to enforcement of draconian legal measures to stop teenagers from having sex. This sort of response only takes us back to the dark ages of times past. Yet, this is what happens when you ask crotchety old men who have not had sex in decades will do when given the opportunity.

The reason that education in this case needs to be personal development and personal health as opposed to just plain and simple sex education is that the data notes that of the 3.2 million people suffering from drug addiction in Indonesia, some 78% of them are teenagers. The data further suggests there are some links between increasing intravenous drug use and increasing numbers of young people becoming HIV positive.

In light of this (rant and rail to follow) it is imperative that the government and educators get their collective heads together and come up with a personal development and personal health curriculum that can be implemented across the board in Indonesian schools. It is critical that we educate our children so that they are forewarned and therefore forearmed. We have a responsibility, not only to our children but, to ourselves to ensure that our children have at their disposal the necessary information to make informed decisions to save themselves from harm. The reality is that we cannot, nor do we want to, live in the pockets of our children 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for the rest of their lives. Nevertheless, we can still give them what they need to understand the dangers and make decisions they feel are best for them.

Thus endeth the sermon!

A Parent at 13-Years-Old...

This particular story out of the UK might have many saying WTF and others simply shaking their heads or others, like me, trying to remember back to when I was 13 and wondering whether this was an outcome I was thinking about.

This is a story of little Alfie Patten, who at the tender age of 13 has managed to get his 15-year-old girlfriend pregnant. Not only did he get her pregnant, it seems that there was a conscious decision to have the child.

Now, I will be 39 this year and I am currently enduring the challenges of fatherhood with our firstborn. I would not say that I am struggling, to the contrary, I am loving it. Nevertheless, I am wondering how well equipped a 13-year-old father and a 15-year-old mother are to be facing these challenges.

By all reports, young Alfie is seemingly a natural and really good with babies. At 13 I would be suggesting that young Alfie is still pretty much a baby himself. However, the pair seem to have the future all mapped out. This includes sharing some of the parenting duties with the baby's grandparents. This is supposedly going to facilitate the pair staying in school and then making the most of their abilities in providing for the kid. Although Alfie seems equally at home with PlayStation and X-Box

The case is an interesting one. It is without a doubt a case to which local social workers will be paying a lot of attention to. Interestingly, the police investigated and decided that it was not in any one's interest to prosecute. This is probably so. A rape charge would seem pretty difficult to sustain and that would leave something like child neglect as a possible charge. Child neglect would also be pretty hard to sustain, unless of course the burden is on the parents to chain their children to the bed.

Let's face it, if the parent(s) have already discussed the "birds + bees" with their kids and the kids go out and do the deed, then really have the parents been neglectful or have the kids just been kids and ignored their parents advice and now have a serious set of consequences to deal with?

It is now that the recriminations will start. Who's at fault? Where did the system fail? Who should pick up the tab on this one?

I do not know that this is indicative of a crumbling social norm in Britain or anywhere else that teenage pregnancies occur. What it is indicative of is a need to reassess whether the idea of abstinence is a sustainable one. Perhaps greater emphasis and more serious levels of sex education (personal development training if you prefer) is necessary in schools so that youngsters are forewarned about the consequences and risks that they face if they engage in sexual behaviour.

At 13, I think I was pretty good on the Atari and I am pretty sure I was not thinking of bedding my girlfriend and becoming a dad. I am not even sure that I had a girlfriend.

Life!

Note:
The photo is subject to copyright (apparently). I tried to contact the paper that I lifted it from but they did not respond, but it can be found here. The photo is accredited to a Lee Thompson.

Governments Regulating Morality

It seems that the Government of Jakarta has decided the best way to break the chain of HIV infections plaguing the capital is to regulate the morality of its citizens and to pass the burden of testing and screening onto businesses. Sometimes you have to worry about the policy wonks and drafters sitting in City Hall and their inability in putting together a coherent policy and a workable law.

What follows might be too analytical for some. However, it is worth pondering some of the points raised.

It might be argued that this Regulation has been a long time in the making and an equally long time in the coming. The Regulation, No. 5 of 2008, seeks to break the chain of HIV infections that, at least, statistically have seen a rapid spike in the upwards direction. HIV/AIDS is a serious problem in the capital and there is no doubt that the government needs to be more proactive in the fight against the virus.

The basic premise of the Regulation is to break the chain of infections. Furthermore, the Regulation is designed to ensure that the quality of life of HIV / AIDS suffers and intra-venous drug users improve. However, the responses that the government proposes to this end are interesting for many reasons. In many ways the provisions of the Regulation seem to be more suggestion in nature than enforceable as the provisions seem to be aimed at regulating moral behaviour and criminalizing poor moral judgment.

The rest of the Regulation deals with matters that provide a loose framework for ensuring that people living with HIV / AIDS have access to adequate medical treatment and are not discriminated against once their HIV status is known either to an employer or the community at large. It is not explicitly clear from the construction of the Regulation but it appears that generally this provision would make it an offence to discriminate against and vilify a person with HIV.

Furthermore, the Regulation requires businesses that are considered to be high risk and potentially sources and spreaders of the virus to be more pro-active in screening their staff for HIV infection. Through to June 2008 there are 3,123 cases of HIV reported in the capital which on a percentage basis is small considering the size of the population.

There are five components to the Regulation:
1. general provisions;
2. promotion;
3. prevention;
4. medicine; and
5. treatment and support.

In general the Regulation targets those individuals that are considered high risk or work in high risk businesses. These businesses are identified in the Elucidation to Article 15(g) as, among others, employees of massage parlors, spas, discotheques, and karaoke joints. However, the Regulation also makes special mention of ensuring that pregnant women and nursing mothers have access to suitable and continuing services to ensure the health of any children born to a HIV positive mother.

Promotion is a matter of communication, information, and education. The promotion role is to be filled by the community, the Central Government, and the Government of Jakarta as required. However, it is expected that there is to be a degree of synergy developed among these promoters to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of any promotions undertaken.

It is expected that the promotion activities will focus on two core elements, namely: changing lifestyle patterns and reducing the stigma attached to being HIV positive.

The educational aspect of the promotional program is to include both internal and external (extracurricular) elements within schools. This means that schools are required to develop a personal development or sex education program that includes materials on HIV / AIDS. Interestingly, the Regulation uses the word “schools” and the Elucidation to the relevant article does not provide any assistance to how schools must be defined. So it is therefore reasonable to assume that the word schools can conceivably include from the primary level through to the senior secondary level.

Nevertheless, the likely target will be senior high school. Yet, if statistics were to bear out that increasingly larger numbers of junior high school students were engaging in high risk behaviours then it would seem to make sense to start the education program at the junior high level.

In a more general sense the promotion elements of the HIV / AIDS program are aimed at promoting the idea that a harmonious and loving family is one that does not tolerate high risk behaviours.

The prevention strategy on face value is a good one. Unfortunately, neither the Regulation nor the Elucidations provide enough detail about how the prevention strategy is going to be implemented in full. There is considerable scope for further regulations in order to “fill” out the regulatory framework.

The prevention strategy includes, among others, the following:
1. abstinence for unmarried people;
2. sexual relations only with those who are your legal partner;
3. use of preventive aids (presumably condoms although nothing is mentioned) by people of known HIV status;
4. programs to reduce the negative impacts of intra-venous drug use;
5. standard operating procedures for organ transplants and blood transfusions;
6. programs to ensure that pregnant women of a known HIV status have prioritized access to antiretroviral drugs to lessen the risk of transmission to their unborn child;
7. programs that require high risk business to routinely screen for HIV infections in their employees;
8. universal precaution for health workers who are at risk of contact with HIV; and
9. family counseling.

The above strategy gives rise to a number of questions. These questions will need to be answered going forward either in a legislative manner or in terms of a commitment to allowing certain strategies to take shape. There is also considerable scope for public / private partnerships to develop in such areas as needle exchange programs and injecting rooms as a means of reducing the negative impacts of intra-venous drug use and abuse. Other possibilities include the development of community health programs that promote the use of condoms and make them readily available to the masses.

Furthermore, the compulsory nature of the obligation on employers to test employees who work in high risk businesses is an interesting one on a number of different levels. For example, the costs of the testing are to be borne by the businesses themselves. However, the Regulation is unclear as to whether the government is going to appoint an accredited screener for the process or are the businesses free to choose a screener of their own? The Regulation is also unclear as to what the employer is to do with an employee who is HIV positive once they are uncovered through the screening process.

Another interesting question not properly addressed in the Regulation is how are bars and pubs to be tested and screened in this process. Admittedly, the Regulation would cover employees of bars but it would not conceivably cover freelance female and male sex workers who might inhabit such establishments. It would appear that there would also be a need to screen these people as well. However, if they are not employees then who does that responsibility fall to? And isn’t the screening of high risk individuals one of the pillars of this piece of legislation?

In a perversely funny kind of a way, the Regulation seems to suggest that certain entertainment venues are places of prostitution. It is clear that prostitution is illegal in Indonesia so if the government of Jakarta is making such an admission then would the more common sense approach be to close these venues down and reduce the level of prostitution in the city.

The reality is that the Regulation is far from being as comprehensive as it might have been. Considering the intent of the Regulation is to break the chain of HIV infection, then to leave large numbers of high risk individuals to voluntary testing would seem to undermine the good intentions of the provisions as they currently stand.

In terms of medicines the Regulation is much more scant on provisions and states that further regulations are to be issued to clarify this matter.

The Regulation creates both Provincial and District / City AIDS Prevention Commissions which in a cynical sense serves to create another level of bureaucracy in the system. However, if the Commissions were able to be developed in a manner that allowed for consolidation of the current diaspora then this may be a positive development.

Interestingly, the Regulation sets out a role for community participation but simultaneously obligates the members of the community to treat people living with HIV / AIDS in a just and humane manner. Combined with the earlier noted provisions, this appears to bring into play the possibility of people being charged and prosecuted for vilifying HIV positive individuals.

The community’s role also seems to include a moral policing aspect as the Regulation is specific in stating that the community must ensure that the is an increase in religiousness of the community and that the existing family units are maintained. The Regulation then goes on to state that the community must create an environment that is conducive for the, presumably, wider acceptance of the fact that there are HIV positive people and drug users living within their midst.

The Regulation also includes a Chapter on investigation and explicitly states that investigators can either be police investigators or appointed civil service investigators. The provisions in Article 27 set out what the investigators are authorized to do but what the Regulation is lacking is specifically what the investigators are to investigate. It is therefore presumed that the matters that would be subject to investigation are those relating to compliance and the specific provisions noted in the Chapter on sanctions.

Yet, it is worth noting that investigators have extensive powers to fingerprint, photograph, and seize property and documents. What is unclear from the Regulation is whether this power is as unfettered as it seems to be.

The provisions require businesses to test staff members at least every three months. Presumably, this means that investigators would be able to demand documents that would prove compliance. The sanctions provisions only note the following offences:

1. failure to keep HIV status data confidential;
2. failure to follow standard operating procedures with regards to transplants and transfusions;
3. non-discrimination against HIV positive people in the provision of medical services; and
4. compulsory HIV screening for high risk employees.

The administrative sanctions would include written warnings to businesses that have failed to comply with screening procedures. Ongoing compliance failures would then allow the government to shut down the business.

The criminal sanctions provide for terms of detention up to three months or fines of up to IDR 50 million. The deliberate spread of HIV is not subject to a specific penalty under this Regulation but rather the Regulation states that the criminal penalty will be whatever is applicable under the prevailing laws and regulations.

The Regulation was issued on 22 July 2008 and came into force on 24 July 2008.