Abstinence is the only protection from STIs
|
The decision to offer free Sexual Transmitted Infection screenings by the Student Health Center is under review, but students shouldn’t get optimistic. Offering a free screening to students will probably be denied. The Student Health Center already charges fees for services.
It is highly unlikely individuals will have access to anything free offered by the Health Center.
Truthfully, the Student Health Center doesn’t want to provide time, knowledge and labor for free. The move for free STI screenings would only become reality after a $4 rise in the medical service fee. Shanna Shultz, political science junior, is responsible for researching the possibility of free STI screenings. She is reviewing this decision because of a grievance brought to ASG Sen. Colter Ray.
Otherwise, accommodating struggling students is not priority No. 1 for the Student Health Center. If this were the case it wouldn’t cost $75 for most STI tests. Currently, a herpes blood test costs $65, and this doesn’t include the cost of medicine, according to the Health Center Web site.
The least the Health Center can do is provide free STI sceenings for individuals who are sexually active. Limiting one free test for each student wouldn’t be adequate for those who are highly sexually active, and for those who don’t practice safe sex. The decision of free screenings should not have a limit and the Health Center should test students without restrictions.
However, if students would learn to start practicing abstinence, individuals would reduce their worry and stress of contracting an STI or disease. The invalid statements made by David Wiley, professor in the department of health, physical education and recreation, is one reason why young adults in society are acquiring sexually transmitted infections at an alarming rate.
“Abstinence-only sex education teaches students not having sex is the only 100 percent sure way to not contract an STI,” Dr. Wiley said. “This forgoes instruction on the proper use and effectiveness of condoms.”
Providing unsuited statements like this mislead students into believing casual sex is acceptable. Not having sex is the only 100 percent sure way to avoid any and all STIs and diseases. Individuals know abstinence is the only effective way to remain STI-free.
Wiley should not be encouraging students to have premarital sex. Condoms and contraceptives are not 100 percent effective, and stating otherwise would be illogical.
Arguing the university educate students about responsible sexual practices at Paws Preview and orientation is not a decision that should even be considered.
The decision suggests Texas State is advocating students participate in casual sex. It would be an error by the administration to support anything other than abstinence.
Nevertheless, since students are going to be sexually active anyway, the Health Center should be willing to make resources more accessible to students. If this means free STI screenings, the issue shouldn’t be overlooked.
Free STI screenings would greatly benefit sexually active students. Health Center officials can show its concern for individuals by providing free STI screenings to the students they claim to care about.
— Tristan Watson is a political science senior.
Permalink
University Star, 601 University Drive, Trinity Building, San Marcos, Texas 78666 | Phone 512.245.3487 | Fax 512.2453708
Comments
WOW
October 29, 2009 by Anonymous (not verified), 3 weeks 3 days ago
Comment id: 983
There are so many things wrong with this article. I dont know where to begin.
Tristan....making no sense again
October 29, 2009 by Anonymous (not verified), 3 weeks 3 days ago
Comment id: 982
Listen Tristan, I know that you live under a rock and you're a professional in Sexual Health Education, but I think (not totally sure) that Dr. Wiley has a bit more expertise in the field of sexual health than you do. Don't believe me? Follow this link and you might believe me http://www.tfn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=JustSayDontKnow, or just type in justsaydontknow.org. Now that I have officially ended your argument and proved that Dr. Wiley will crush any argument you have about abstinence let's move on.
Next, just because Texas State may one day choose to educate students about proper sexual health behaviors does not mean that they are advocating sex. The point here is that if you look at Dr. Wiley's findings (or you can refer to your "statistics"), students are given invalid statements throughout Texas pertaining to sexual health. The point is that abstinence does not work (again refer to Dr. Wiley's findings). So let's evaluate your claim that the university would be advocating premarital sex with sexual health presnetations during orientation. What if the university educated students on skin cancer and provided them with sunglasses that protected their eyes from harmful UV rays, gave them sunscreen, along with a list of other items that would help students not get skin cancer. Upon being educated, do you believe the students would automatically run to Sewell Park, take off all their clothes, and begin to tan for hours upon end until they look like Don (the fishcamp guy, but you may not know since you embedded under that rock)? Apparently you do believe that's what will happen. Because sexual health education does the same as a skin cancer presentation. Students are given the proper education, materials (some form of contraception), and a list of other things to do in order to prevent an infection.
Tristan, Wiley is not "encouraging" sex, he's just saying that you need to be informed. I have read some of your extremely biased articles (I get it, it's in opinions), but if you take the time, sit down, and read over Wiley's information you might want to think twice about calling him out again. Texas Doesn't have one of the highest pregnancy rates in America because we actually teach students about sexual health, it's because we teach them biased, abstinence only programs that don't help the cause.
Get out from under that rock, it'll do you some good.
"abstinence is the only
October 28, 2009 by Anonymous (not verified), 3 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 974
"abstinence is the only effective way to remain STI-free."--- Unless of course, you contract it through a non-sexual activity like sharing a drink, getting a blood transfusion, playing athletics, eating, exposure to bodily fluids (at work, at home, at school), sharing a house/bedroom, or being the victim of assault.
What about individuals who choose NOT to get married? Should they be virgins until they die?
Or if a couple decides NOT to get married, ever. They should abstain from all sexual activity for the rest of their lives too?
Student should be provided
October 28, 2009 by Anonymous (not verified), 3 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 970
Student should be provided FREE TESTS for STD STI AND WHATEVER OTHER DISEASES SPAWN in the future.
It is a colllege campus where, let's face it, more people are having sexual relations in college than out in the business world.
Charging fees and encouraging abstinence is a great policy on paper but in reality, the influx of students and the influence of alcohol seem to render the idea useless. (Ex. Sarah Palin and her daughter)
Will the student health center go out of bueinesss by not providing free services for these services??? Or will the dept jsut generate less revenue to ashow on their books at years end?
Schools should market themselves as an overall benefit to students beyond the EDUCATION becasue when life: crime, health issues, etc strike college students, it's not as if they have a health care plan taken out and they are most likely faced with asking mom and dad for money, with im sure the "system" loves to gladly accept.
Post new comment