Girls aged 12 'temporarily sterilised'

Forums › Off topic › Girls aged 12 'temporarily sterilised'

mobygeek

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#21115 16-Apr-2008 10:11

So goes a headline in the sydney morning herald... We had a good discussion about drugs etc a while back, anyone want to put their two cents-worth in? It would help if you read the article... http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/girls-aged-12-temporarily-sterilised/2008/04/15/1208025189880.html There's also another one on aboriginal children, from stolen generations being used as guinea pigs for leprosy drugs in the thirties...

Anyway, one person reckons the implantation of a three year contraceptive tacitly condones rape... Three young girls who have had the impant are not pregnant, but do have STI's...

I wonder which is the worst? I have had five pregnancies and survived. Don't know that I would like HPV, or any other STI.

Ps, remember when it used to be called VD, anyone?

Nightwyrm

588 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#123946 16-Apr-2008 10:42

mobygeek: remember when it used to be called VD, anyone?

I'd love to know why it's called STI now. Is calling it a sexually-transmitted infection more PC and nicer sounding than a sexually-transmitted disease?

Post-geek, opinionated mediaphile, and natural born cynic. Jack of all genres, master of none.

Kommisar

54 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#124066 16-Apr-2008 14:22

I think it's because of term "disease" and how it has much more of a negative impact then the word "infection" so all in all id say it's something more to do with being PC, I've noticed these days alot of things are being changed to be more "PC" with Social Welfare being one of them with there changed from SIPS to CYFS. And yes we remember VD!

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#124070 16-Apr-2008 14:31

Its political correctness with a reason - STD and the word disease have a stigma associated that infection does not. Makes it easier to broach and discuss without having loaded (or more correctly, more loaded) terms involved. Anything that presents a possible barrier to frank discussion should be addressed, right?

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

mobygeek

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#124105 16-Apr-2008 16:39

But we are having a frank discussion, aren't we! Infection, maybe that has the connotation of infectious? People ought to know they can seriously damage another human being's health.

Wonder what Mr Dictionary says? (Ever notice I use the masculine for most things here? Mr 'Puter, Mr Dictionary, wonder what else I can come up with???) The Macquarie Thesaurus equates infection with disease.

And when asked, Junior just responded with 'weren't there only two back in the fifties? Herpes and AIDS?' Boy, have I got my work cut out for me! It's a good thing he likes to talk so much - I have him over a barrel here. I can discuss anything with him and get him talking! Mind you, the others have told him again and again not to tell crude jokes to his mother...

Wonder what good theories we can come up with...

Nightwyrm

588 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#124106 16-Apr-2008 16:41

Mayhaps it's that an infection sounds curable but a disease doesn't?

Post-geek, opinionated mediaphile, and natural born cynic. Jack of all genres, master of none.

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#124113 16-Apr-2008 16:57

Lugh I think you've partly hit it on the head, disease as a state certainly has more overtones of permanence than infection, which is generally thought of as being a transient state. I also think the word disease has attained pejorative meaning quite above and beyond the point you make.

Mobygeek, I wasn't directing that point at you, I'm talking about the interface between health-care professional and patient. In that context the point I was making is vital, although your point is also another good reason for the change as diseases apply to non-infectious causes also.

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

mobygeek

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#124139 16-Apr-2008 18:40

Mobygeek, I wasn't directing that point at you, I'm talking about the interface between health-care professional and patient. In that context the point I was making is vital, although your point is also another good reason for the change as diseases apply to non-infectious causes also.

No, too many big words for me. What's this interface? Please elaborate, I'd like to know more...

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#124160 16-Apr-2008 19:53

That would be jargon for when a patient is face-to-face with a health professional in a consultation. Sorry, medical student here, the jargon just comes to the surface no matter how hard you try sometimes...

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

mobygeek

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#124179 16-Apr-2008 20:57

I don't mind talking to a medical student! Have you read the article? What's your opinion? What I get upset about is the use of young girls for sexual gratifiacation of 'older men'. I put that in inverted commas because they may not be that old, either. But someone (who has had sex with someone else previously) has given another person a disease. Dis - Ease. Pain, medication, perhaps drugs that have side effects. Emotional hangups from being raped? Not being able to actually conceive when one actually wants to - and some people reckon that having a baby can be the best thing that's ever happened to/for teens. Oh, and apparently the implant they are using can be seen by the 'naked eye'. (Sorry, no better choice of words for tonight...) Don't get upset if I don't reply tonight, I'm packing it in for the day. But I do like a good hearty discussion...

goodie

39 posts

Geek

#124457 17-Apr-2008 18:10

Im not sure if its more shocking that they need to do this, or that they actually are...

I guess this really puts the state some people live in aussie land in perspective... even in a 'highly' devoped country.

-Goodie

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#124610 18-Apr-2008 08:39

The plight of Aboriginal people in Australia is truly terrible.

In NZ we still have a ways to go in terms of achieving equality - for example Maori life-expectancy still trails non-Maori life-expectancy by some 8-10 years - but in Australia its even worse. Aboriginal life-expectancy trails non-Aboriginal persons by around 20-25 years (where Maori were 30-40 years or so ago), and institutional racism abounds (Northern Territories 3 strikes law for example). I'd encourage everyone here to look up some of the history of Australian race relations and educate some of their Australian contacts...

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

mobygeek

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#124648 18-Apr-2008 09:44

I typed up a book report for my daughter once, it was on a home for aboriginal girls outside of Canberra, or somewhere ther-abouts before Canberra actually existed. Had a friend in Tuncurry who had actually been born the

re. Her other wouldn't talk about it, it was that bad. Don't remember the name of the book but it was pretty shocking stuff. If our Aussie mates, mine included, don't know this stuff they would have to have their heads buried in the sand?

My aunty reckoned my dad was aboriginal, which was one of the reasons my grandfather hated him, he looked different. Well, he's not, but aunty (the crazy one) is right into aboriginal rights, even to attending women's conferences in sydney. I think she wishes she was, she might have an excuse for being screwed up?

Anyway, it's not too long ago in NZ that hormone implants were used for lower class women and I, as a middleclass WASP was encouraged not to have my children immunised for whatever, sorry, can't remember which disease, too long ago, but that was from the maternity hospital nurses...

I guess 'we' aren't there yet? But it's a good conversation...

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#124672 18-Apr-2008 10:26

mobygeek: If our Aussie mates, mine included, don't know this stuff they would have to have their heads buried in the sand?

For the most part the Australian community appears very ignorant of what has happened, and what is actually happening now for Aboriginees. Its just not a part of their collective conscious.

Thats not just a matter of personal responsibility though, look at Howards refusal to apologise for the stolen generation (on the grounds that an academic article stated it was only 10% of that generation, Mr Howard appeared to have completely missed the fact that the phrase was probably meant to capture the emotive, rather than the statistical), or the coverage of those issues in the media. When your government refuses to acknowledge any culpability, when this stance becomes part of your determination of social policy, when your schools don't teach enough of your own history (aside from glorifying its colonial aspects), and your media reinforces stereotypes, what can you expect?

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

mobygeek

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#124826 18-Apr-2008 18:59

Well, there were certainly no aboriginal studies when I was at school. I probably learned more about the culture from Art History, and my pictorial history of Australia.