The teen pregnancy rate in Canada is declining faster than in the United States, England or Sweden, and experts say that reflects a generation of teenagers who are better informed about sex and young women who see a future that includes goals other than motherhood. Between 1996 and 2006, the most recent years for which information is available for all four countries, Canada’s teen pregnancy rate fell by 36.9 per cent, according to a study released Wednesday by the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada. That’s compared to a 25-per-cent decline in the U.S., a 4.75-per-cent dip in England and Wales, and a 19.1-per-cent increase in Sweden.
Hey, don’t get me wrong. I’m glad the rates are down. I’m just wondering whether it’s possible that pregnancy rates might be down because Canadian teenagers (at least, some of them) are having less sex?
by 
The same article was on CBC’s website but it has some more stats. The CBC article states:
“The study also found about 50 per cent of all 16- and 17-year-olds are sexually active, according to Statistics Canada. That figure hasn’t changed, McKay said.”
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/05/26/teen-pregnancy.html#ixzz0p8b7pmQD
Still good news though…
how about chemical abortions (Plan B) having an effect?
I have heard more than once a young woman asking for it (and I don’t spend a lot of time in pharmacies!!)
I don’t think they could include Plan B…because alot of time girls take it and they were never pregnant in the first place. Therefore it would be hard to know whether or not they took it “just in case” and there was no fertilization or if they took it and Plan B actually prevented implantation of a fertilzed egg. So while they could find stats on who bought Plan B and the reasons why. There would be no way to get stats on how many times Plan B stopped implantation of a fertilized egg in the women who took it.
Might it be too, with the demographic decline, that there are less teenagers, then less sex happening? Though, that wouldn’t change percentages. I just imagine the stats wouldn’t take that into account, what with the world getting ‘overpopulated’ and all.
Guys, here is Peter McKay’s report (from SIECAN).
http://www.beststart.org/events/detail/bsannualconf08/presentations/PC1_1mckay.pdf
It looks like sexual activity is down among young men, but hasn’t changed much among young women. (slide 21). Also, more people are experimenting with oral sex, (slide 24).
what is the relationship between Siecan and Siecus?
I know what Miriam Grossman (of “You’re Teaching my child what?!” fame) thinks of Siecus!
————————————-
“The teen pregnancy rate in Canada is declining faster than in the United States, England or Sweden, and experts say that reflects a generation of teenagers who are better informed about sex and young women who see a future that includes goals other than motherhood. ”
I am really irritated by that last part. I am a single parent AND a university student. Mothers can still have goals and aspirations that do not have anything to do with their children, just like most fathers. We need to stop sending the messge to young women that having a child precludes them from financial and personal success
(Its Alex McKay)
SIECCAN is not exactly an objective sponsor of this research. The entire purpose of the group, which it takes only minutes to determine from browsing their site, is to promote all forms of ‘contraception'(including abortion), and acceptance and familiarity with all forms of sexual behaviour, through the public schools. They have been very successful in Canada.
Yes, contraception reduces the number of babies. But do we really want the people teaching contraception to be teaching ‘all sex is ok’? 50 % activity levels for teens is nothing to cheer about.
Whoops Iwestin. Of course you’re right. It’s Alex and not Peter McKay. Freudian slip.
You’re right that SIECCAN is not objective. I went through their “Sexual health education in the schools: Questions & Answers” ( http://www.sieccan.org/pdf/she_q&a_3rd.pdf ) and throughout it they referenced (many times) the “Canadian Guidelines For S*xual Health Education” put out by the Public Health Agency of Canada, and written by (you guessed it) members of SIECCAN. Circular referencing at its best.
Actually, I don’t have such a problem with that. SIECCAN is certainly entitled to its opinion, and can use whatever references it wants. The problem I have is twofold. One, it takes a one size fits all approach to s*xual health. Canada is a very diverse country, and what works in downtown Toronto will not necessarily work in rural Alberta. And two, it asks and answers the wrong questions. They survey students, and then, when they find out they are behaving a certain way, they prescribe behavioural modifications to “keep them safe from disease and unwanted pregnancy”. Rather, I think they should be asking what is motivating their s*xual activity. It is hardly empowering a young woman to send her off with a condom and pat her on the back for being responsible, if the reason she is having s*x is that she wants to be popular.
I would really like to see some research done examining young people’s motivation for having s*x. If they really are little Romeos and Juliets, that is one thing, but if they are sleeping together because they are lonely, or bored, or just trying to fit in, maybe we, the adults, should be stepping up tot he plate and helping them find better outlets for their angst.
“maybe we, the adults, should be stepping up tot he plate and helping them find better outlets for their angst.”
Parents need to step up and be parental. They need to remember that public schools are a relatively new thing, and that the education of children is primarily the responsibility of parents. There is a good reason for this. The parents love them. The dept. of ed. doesn’t. The dept. of ed. sees the students as something that has to fit in with the ideology of the day, and the budget.
The typical attitude of a education dept. official in Canada today (not talking schoolboard here) is that they have more right to determine what and when the students learn, than the parents do. They feel they are eminently more qualified. Parents need to stand up and say “I will not relinquish my responsibilities to the gov’t”. They need to go to school boards and make their choices clear. They need to find alternative education when the dept. doesn’t acknowledge their choices (see firing of entire schoolboards in NS – over sex-ed curriculum).
Orgs like SIECCAN are motivated by their ideology. Parents need to be motivated by the love of their children, and unconcerned about the ‘experts’ opinions. Noone knows their children better than good parents do. Have the confidence that the inherent responsibility gives you, and act accordingly – do your best , not the best that the gov’t offers.
Of course, going with the flow is a lot easier, and Canadians are ‘easy-going’ people. That’s our claim to fame, right?
One way parents do have influence over their children’s behaviour: they can decide when they will be allowed to start dating. (And yes, I know, there will be the the kids who sneak out the bedroom window to meet the boyfriend on a romantic moonlit night, but most kids will respect their parents’ limits most of the time.)
http://www.mercatornet.com/family_edge/view/7293/