Further Hippocratic Oath-Breaking, this time by American Academy of Pediatricians…..
Last week I posted an article concerning one appraisal from the medical community regarding what constitutes “responsibility” on the part of a “man” in a casual sexual relationship.
The latest iteration is this article, which discusses the latest recommendations issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics concerning sexually-active teenaged girls.
In a nutshell, the Academy recommends that girls who are sexually active should receive a hormonal implant, or IUD. One of the great problems with “The Pill” is that a girl or woman must take it every day at the same time. Otherwise, it doesn’t do a very good job at preventing pregnancy.
An implant is effective from the time of implantation for up to ten years or until removed. The lead author of the updated recommendation is quoted as saying that “All methods of hormonal birth control are safer than pregnancy.” The words “safe” and “safer” are used euphemistically here. Pre-marital sex is not safe. Hormonal birth control is not safe.
Sure, not being pregnant is safer than being pregnant. Fewer women experience complications from taking hormonal birth control than from the natural process involving the development and safe delivery of a healthy newborn person. That’s like saying that keeping your Ferrari in the garage is safer than driving it. But pre-marital sexual activity for a teenager is driving underage without a license, which no department of motor vehicles would ever condone. Safer does not mean that an implant delivering chemicals so as to artificially regulate one’s reproductive cycle is actually safe.
Potentially, and ideally, pregnancy is one effect of sexual activity for which there is consequence to both woman and man in the sexual relationship. The natural law makes severe demands on both parties. Even the civil law (as it presently stands) exacts a duty to one’s offspring to provide some minimal support.
Meanwhile, in the case of the use of a hormonal implant or IUD, any of the other effects from sexual activity experienced by a woman (or girl) do not bind the man in any way. Her other injuries are not his concern.
This recommendation is another signal that something even more insidious is afoot. Secular culture continues to find more perverse ways to objectify women, all while calling it empowerment. We are supposed to believe that 50 Shades of Grey and female performers gyrating on stage are good things for feminism. These cultural movements are coupled to recommendations from the medical communities legitimizing sexual activity among the young and unmarried. Pope Francis says that Satan presents things as though they are good, but his intention is destruction.
The age of majority as necessary for consent is being forcefully brought to its terminus, and this new recommendation is more dredge along the way. Younger and younger objects are demanded to sate cultural appetites. The only thing made safer by these new recommendations is how much safer (easier, with fewer external consequences) it will be to objectify and prey on the young.
