This issue has emerged in many places like the inner city schools of America, the primary schools of Wales or in health education programs in the developing countries, the advice that condoms should be encouraged and promoted in order to resolve the issue of unwanted pregnancies or the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the proliferation of HIV. There is a lot of scientific evidence which supports the fact that condoms when used properly reduce the occurrence of such problems, however there are many critics who fear that that by encouraging the use of condoms would advance the onset of sexual activity amongst the young. To be a bit more specific the more conservative religious traditions and groups that oppose contraception, oppose the move to distribution of condoms in schools because they fear that the basic religious values would be overlooked by their children.
Alternatively the critics of condom distribution suggest that there should be abstinence only education on this issue. Sex education in this context would encourage the young individuals to abstain from sexual activity in order to avoid pregnancy and diseases. However these programs have had mixed results in the past. In the developed countries commercial influences and social pressures lead to students defying abstinence. While in developing countries where the culture is such that it encourages the development of large families, the educational programs are not so well funded or comprehensive.
This issue has gained a lot of importance in the US and the UK with regard to this implementation in not only high schools but public schools as well. Now we will discuss the pros and cons of distributing condoms freely in high school. We have already discussed how distribution of condoms would reduce the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the occurrence of underage pregnancies. If you accept the fact that condoms are a good prevention measure, then it is obvious that their distribution can have a great impact. Also providing condoms to students is actually the morally realistic action to follow, educators do not have to encourage sex but they can motivate students to make wise choices when they decide to have sex. Believe it or not it is wise to know that some young individuals, regardless of the abstinence messages will have sex, in such cases such condom distribution is the better option. Also this could be a wise investment by the government as they spend large amounts of funds each year in order to address the public health issues which are a result of dangerous sexual behavior. There is the cost of raising many children which are created through unintended pregnancies or the cost of treating a HIV patient, these costs can be enormous.
Moreover providing access to birth control empowers women of today, giving them more control over their body. Historically women have suffered more due to the restrictive policies related to reproduction like abortion laws. Men however do not have to face the consequences of their actions as much. Hence distribution of condoms boosts the responsibility of men and enlarges the choices for women.
Conversely there are many disadvantages to the distribution of condoms as well, like the belief that such distribution would lead to early onset of sexual activity amongst the young, as they believe that they would be safe so they would indulge in this immoral behavior more often. Also providing condoms to children in high school can offend people coming from many religions like Catholics who do not believe in birth control. They would find this as an encouragement of sexual activity and against their religious traditions.
Moreover taxpayers should not have to support programs that object to morally. This could also lead to more peer pressure amongst students to participate in sex and some say that the effectiveness of condoms is grossly exaggerated. However in my opinion such distribution is necessary when children are exposed to such commercial influences and societal pressures, it is essential to warn them and tell them how to prevent disastrous consequences, it is the more practical thing to do. Better safe than sorry.