Birth Control - 50/50?

[Perny]

It's completely ridicullous!
If they both don't want kids at the moment, then the boyfriend should tip in too! It's only fair. It seems like she is paying to have sex (and avoid being preggo) while the guy just can jump on humping anytime his li' fellow is feeling happy. He should help her split the bill!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Kemy]

I'd be perfectly happy to split the cost, its a shared responsibility after all. Oddly enough last time around it was her who bought it most of the time but still.

 

[Perny]

It's fine if she doesn't mind buying it, but if she asks the guy to split the bill, he damn well better!

 

[randiann]

Seriously, if they've been living together for over a year...I'm thinking yeah. Especially in these times, money can become an extremely important issue if it is tight. I've always taken care of my own birth control, mainly because I fall into the dirt poor can get it free here in America category, and I can also go to the Indian clinic and get free healthcare. Not manly people have that option though. And there are A LOT of people who fall into that middle category; they don't make enough to be able to afford health insurance (which is ridiculously expensive), yet they make too much to be able to get birth control for free or at a reduced rate.
I know when I had to get a day after pill it was my boyfriend who bought it. I offered to pay for half of that, but he ended up paying for it anyway. He felt like it was his responsibility for me to have what I needed to make sure no suprises happen, especially since he had the cash for it and I didn't.

 

[Veyron]

Personally I wouldn't offer to buy any contraception items unless the lady in question asked me to help with the financial side of things.

The reason behind this?

I'm a gentleman. I was brought up to believe that woman's monthly cycles and contraception are private things that women prefer to keep to themselves. Old fashioned I know, but my parents (God bless them) are both in their 70's and that's the way it was done in their youth so they passed that morality onto me and my siblings.

Of course I'm aware that times have changed around me and my parents but this ethos is too deeply engrained in me to change now - but as I say, if I were in a relationship and the lady asked for cash for contraception then I'd happily put my hand in pocket for either the whole cost or half - either way works as long as she's happy.

 

[Karol]

I have to go with Hannah on this one. If a kid is going to have sex at such a young age, they're going to have sex at such a young age. People underestimate kids. The availability of contraception isn't really an encouragement at all. I'd rather have them educated and safe than ignorant and pregnant.

I don´t think the problem is if they are going to have sex or not. I leave in a country that has BC pills, it´s TERRIBLE. Girls just go there, take a medicine without thinking about it, and just have sex without any other protection! Meaning = diseases all over it.
I think BC are made for serious relationships, when you have a partner and you dont want children. It´s not made to be free for everybody have sex without guilt.

 

[Veyron]

I disagree with the statement that people are using BC pills just to have sex without guilt - anyone should be able to have sex without guilt and without the prospect of having to have a child as the consequence - which is why I disagree with the Catholic religions views on contraception.

BC pills and condoms should be given away free of charge to anyone over the legal age of consent in your country who wants them with the Government footing the bill - religious beliefs be damned.

The general populace no matter where you live should also be told about STD's, AIDS and all of the other nasty things that can happen after unprotected sex - and because they aren't told by anyone this should make free contraception an even bigger priority.

 

[LittleMissLikesToFight]

Getting into personal territory, i am on BC right now and with insurance only pay $10 a month. but after i graduate i'm going to lose my insurance and for that in between time until i find a job that covers, my boyfriend said no problem, he's going to help cover half the cost, whatever it may be. it's an important thing to both of us and i didn't even have to ask. i just told him i was worried about affording it in a few months and without hesitation he said he'd help pay.

 

[Karol]

I disagree with the statement that people are using BC pills just to have sex without guilt - anyone should be able to have sex without guilt and without the prospect of having to have a child as the consequence - which is why I disagree with the Catholic religions views on contraception.

BC pills and condoms should be given away free of charge to anyone over the legal age of consent in your country who wants them with the Government footing the bill - religious beliefs be damned.

The general populace no matter where you live should also be told about STD's, AIDS and all of the other nasty things that can happen after unprotected sex - and because they aren't told by anyone this should make free contraception an even bigger priority.

the problem is this is too ideological... Thing don´t happend this way all over the world. We can´t allowed ALL people to have sex with no risk of getting pregnant and the HUGE risk of getting sick! Maybe this would work on Sweden, but not over the world, you know? My country is full of STD´s cause of this, it´s a culture problem that it´s not easy to solve. NOBODY cares about the STD, AIDS and stuff, they just don´t want to have to carry a children for the rest of their lifes. People don´t have the education (the one that comes with family), the culture, the nothing to make this decision by theirselves. But it´s easier to give BC pills, have less children pregnant, looks good in the paper.
Lections about SDTs and AIDS doenst chance anything some places... It´s almost impossible not to know that unprotected sex is dangerous in this days.. We have television, books, school, family, radio, campaigns all over the world... This is not a excuse to do it. People have unprotected sex cause they choose to, and cause it´s easy to go to the hospital and get some BC pills for free.
The correct thing to do would be NEVER have sex without condoms, even when you´re married for 20-years, but it´s a lost cause...

Here they also give after day pills for free here, it´s a huge irresponsability....

 

[Veyron]

Well I agree with some of the points you make in the post above Darling, but we'll have to agree to disagree on this subject.

 

[palabravampiress]

First of all, not everyone can get birth control pills on the cheap or at all. When I lost my job and my health insurance, my husband's income was such that it excluded us from public assistance type discounts, but didn't provide enough for health insurance. I went to the Planned Parenthood where, for liability reasons, they told me they couldn't prescribe me the pill. I have migraines and a few other conditions that make the pill a little riskier for me. I also have Poly-Cystic Ovarian Disease, which makes the pill pretty necessary for me. It's not just birth control; it's also medicine. I couldn't get the medicine I needed until we got health insurance. People should keep that in mind when they consider the morality of making it easily available.

Second, while it's a little different with us being married and all, I've gotta say that I have no problem with the notion of a couple splitting the cost. My hubby and I have a joint bank account and therefore split all costs by virtue of the fact that all income goes into the same pot and all expenses flow from the same pot. I think the advice columnist was wrong; if a couple is splitting all other expenses, then why should this one be any different?

 

[Buffanator]

while it's a little different with us being married and all, I've gotta say that I have no problem with the notion of a couple splitting the cost. My hubby and I have a joint bank account and therefore split all costs by virtue of the fact that all income goes into the same pot and all expenses flow from the same pot. I think the advice columnist was wrong; if a couple is splitting all other expenses, then why should this one be any different?

I was gonna say this, but you said it so well, I'll just tack on with "Yup". :biggrin:

 

[Lindsey McDonald]

the problem is this is too ideological... Thing don´t happend this way all over the world. We can´t allowed ALL people to have sex with no risk of getting pregnant and the HUGE risk of getting sick! Maybe this would work on Sweden, but not over the world, you know? My country is full of STD´s cause of this, it´s a culture problem that it´s not easy to solve. NOBODY cares about the STD, AIDS and stuff, they just don´t want to have to carry a children for the rest of their lifes. People don´t have the education (the one that comes with family), the culture, the nothing to make this decision by theirselves. But it´s easier to give BC pills, have less children pregnant, looks good in the paper.
Lections about SDTs and AIDS doenst chance anything some places... It´s almost impossible not to know that unprotected sex is dangerous in this days.. We have television, books, school, family, radio, campaigns all over the world... This is not a excuse to do it. People have unprotected sex cause they choose to, and cause it´s easy to go to the hospital and get some BC pills for free.
The correct thing to do would be NEVER have sex without condoms, even when you´re married for 20-years, but it´s a lost cause...

Here they also give after day pills for free here, it´s a huge irresponsability....

Kids having unprotected sex is a completely different issue from free, readily available contraception. As you say, it's now become a cultural thing. Do you really believe that if the girls couldn't get the free contraceptive pill they'd stop having sex or force their partner to wear a condom? It's not going to happen. Teenage pregnancy rates would soar.

It's education that's needed. People need to be made aware in schools from a young age about the true dangers of unprotected sex. Yes, it should be the parent's job. But that doesn't exclude the school from providing the important facts. Taking away the contraception won't help. It would just make things worse. Look at underage drinking. It's illegal to buy alcohol underage, but does that stop people? No.

 

[JenniferAlice]

My mum was using 2 types of contraception and she still got pregnant with me.

Don't know if this adds to the debate, just thought I'd stick that out there.

 

[Schillaci]

I don't care what anybody says, tries to proclaim, in a relationship there is NO 50/50.

The men eat the beef, watch the sports, bring home the bacon, and buy the condoms.

The women.. uhm... cook the beef, turn on the sports channel for the guy, clean the house, and ask the guy for cash to buy personal necessities, like birth control pills.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Veyron agrees: The British NHS system does away with the need for health insurance thus I doubt you'd have many problems, if any at all, getting the drugs you need to combat your issues. Making people pay for health care is wrong in my opinion.

Well thats not entirely true is it?

We pay for our health care, we pay for it through taxation. Don't paint the UK as this Health Haven because it does cost us and there are some mighty problems with it.

However it is a far better system than what I have experienced with the US medical system.

I really do think, however, that underage sex and BC are entirely different topics and making BC more readily available won't add ot take away from the statistics of underage sex.

It is natural for kids to wonder about it and even experiment BUT they will do it when they want and having access to BC won't change that BUT it might make fewer teen pregancies happen.

 

[Blondie Bear]

Great, thanks for reminding me that my prescription is about to expire and I have to find time to go get it renewed sometime in the next month. *grumble*

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Veyron agrees: My nephew's school has just given him a sex ed lesson & he's 3! I think that's way too young to introduce a child to anything sexual. Birth control however, should be made available to anyone from 10 yrs onward due to, as you say, experimentation

That is absolutely a) disgusting b) pointless.

No 3 year old is gonna need to know the birds and the bees in full.

Heck, you can get away until the age of about 8 with 'The Stork brough Baby Jeffrey'.

HOWEVER, I do believe that sex education should begin at around the age of 11 - high school - because thats when things really start to happen, particularly because of the numerous age groups.

 

[Schillaci]

My nephew's school has just given him a sex ed lesson & he's 3! I think that's way too young to introduce a child to anything sexual. Birth control however, should be made available to anyone from 10 yrs onward due to, as you say, experimentation

Why would he be in school at 3 years old? Isn't that a little young?

I've known kids to lose their virginity at 10 years old. I think sex ed should begin at about 8/9 years old, but on a very light note. First year in high school is when sex ed should really begin, on a more extensive scale.

 

[La Luna Unita]

I mean, if it's free, then what stops my daughter from walking into a clinic at 10 years old and walking out ready for sex. The thought gives me chills. I think screwing would start at a much younger age, and I'm not down with that.

Typically, a minor can't receive birth control without the consent of their guardian. Also, I think in the case of the gay club passing out condoms they probably wouldn't allow underagers in at all, so no free condoms that way either. But the situation is similar to kids who hang around the liquor store waiting for someone willing to buy beer for them: ultimately, kids are going to get away with what they want if they try hard enough.

I've also given the underage sex thing a lot of thought, but I don't agree with our current educational standard of "abstinence only" as the social and moral imperative taught in schools. In high school, I knew what sex was, I knew how to get it and I knew where to find a condom, but I also had parents who kept track of where I was, who I was with, and made sensible rules that kept me safe while still allowing me freedom. Having access to birth control would not have changed my decisions, but it would have kept my school from having the highest teen pregnancy rate in the state. The kids at my school still did what they wanted, BC or no BC. I agree that with kids more than just a parent needs to be watching out for them, though. For example, no ten-year-old (or any minor) should ever be able to talk to a doctor and receive BC without the doctor first contacting the parent, or proof of special circumstances being brought to light. It's common sense to look at that situation and say "what's wrong here?"

Regarding the cost of BC, I agree that the cost could be 50/50, but only if it works for the couple (as in, yeah, the girl should be willing to shell out for Viagra down the line if it comes to that, or maybe the guy should point out that he's been purchasing condoms all this time if that's the case). Compromise is important, and what's more important is to realize when you're giving it up to someone who doesn't share your values. If sex is for two people, but prevention of pregnancy only for one person, there's something wrong with the picture.