I Would like Your Opnions

While I would love it if my sons abstained until marriage for these exact reasons, I am no dummy to think they will. If you are sexually active then yes it is important you are tested for a variety of diseases. I also feel that if you are tested for HIV it brings home just how risky unsafe and multiple partner sex is and could result in teens really thinking twice about their actions not because mom and dad said so, but because they are really aware of their health.
I know they are teens, but some may say that about kids and handwashing. I'll tell you what, my kids are very aware of how important washing their hands are in keeping them healthy. . . I think it is an extension of that very lesson that could be applied here.

Do you know what happens to your insurability when you get diagnosed with HIV? Good luck with getting reasonable health care premiums (we'll see what happens to health care in the next 5 years) or life insurance, and getting your info out of the databases where this info might be stored.

I'm all for safe sex and testing if a person wants it - I would just do it anonymously.

We have to be very careful now-a-days and think several steps ahead. The system sure won't do it for you.

I honestly dont see what it could hurt. We all BELIEVE that it's only sexually transmitted or by blood transfusion, but ya really never know do ya? Most moms dont even know the blood types of their children.
My youngest son has been an avid donor since he turned 18 so of course he had to be tested.
My opinion is that it's probably not a bad idea... and if you dont know already you can have them "typed" at the same time.

Based on the artical there are about 27,500 people in the U.S. between the ages of 13-24 who don't know they are infected with the HIV virus. That's a really, really small percentage of the population. I understand why they want the children to be tested, but I also think it's going to be a really BIG money maker. Think of all the people between ages 16-24 who will feel pressured by their doctors to have the testing done who aren't infected but who will get it done anyway because the doctor recommended it. I personally have been "pressured" by my doctors to have HIV testing done with each of my pregnancies. I think between my life insurance policies, other disease diagnosises and pregnancies I've probably been tested for HIV at least 9 times....someone is making a lot of money off of those tests!
I forgot to answer your question, no I wouldn't support it unless my children were sexually active. If they are not sexually active, I don't see the need to spend the money on the testing.

I think a lot of people are missing the real gist of this:

The reason the American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends that ALL teens 16 to 18 years old receive regular, routine HIV tests is because when they test ONLY the "sexually active youth... (they're) not getting those youth (the sexually active ones) to actually test and we have not decreased the number of new infections in [that] population..."

So.....when a 16-18 goes to the doc and they are asked about sexual behavior, they lie, or omit and are NOT being tested at all. The infection spreads.

So, in a way, this is a bit of overkill by calling for the testing of ALL 16-18 year olds so that the HIV infected youth can be found out, identified and treated...BUT I feel it will probably do some good at finding that segment that needs treatment, education, etc. Obviously, what's being done now is not working.

So...yeah...I would have no problem having my 16-18 tested.

Crazy--they don't even do an HIV test at a marriage blood test! Hellloooo?

The article is talking whether to test kids that say they are not sexually active. It's important to test all of them, because kids don't think oral sex means they are sexually active. There are a whole lot of girls with stds in thier throat because they thought having oral sex was not really sex and they were still virgins. SO, f the doc asks these girls if they are sexually active they are going to say no.

I've been tested and let me tell you....that is the longest 3 days you will ever experience. I spent the whole time going back over every questionable decision I ever made and it made me much more careful.

I have a cousin who is now 21 and found out that he was HIV pos at 18. Not to feed into the sterotype, but he discovered he was gay around 13 or 14 and became very reckless in his sexual incounters starting around 14 or 15. Had they urged or offered this test to him or his mom when he was 16, it may have been discovered sooner, or been able to be used to rule out (though limitedly) his infection period.

I think doctors are hesitent to recommend it to parents because many parents refuse to see their teens as sexually active or don't want to really *think* about the consequences of their teens actions. Of course, I know that as soon as my teens become sexually active, this is just one out of a myriad of tests that I will require be done.

Yes, I support this.

This helps protect not only sexually active kids but kids who are exposed to needles (IV drug use, for example), and you don't have to be sexually active to be exposed to HIV.

I think it is great not only as a diagnostic tool, but as a teaching tool, and preventative tool. Teens have superman complexes and think "it won't happen to me." When you are taking that test, you have to entertain the thought of a positive result. It is an accountability measure that makes them think. It teaches them that this is one of the ways we take responsibility for our sexuality, by testing every 6 months to one year until we are in a monogamous realationship and testing after and before another one. It starts them out in the way they need to continue and just makes it part of what you do.

I think it's kind of awesome.

It's IMPERATIVE that people with HIV find out as soon as possible! Due to the cocktails and available drugs now, people can live for years being HIV positive without developing full-blown AIDS and dying. If my child had contracted it, I would want to know as soon as possible so we could start treatment. I really hope my kids will wait awhile before becoming sexually active and that they'll practice safe sex, but there are no guarantees. Plus, you have to consider the fact that anyone with HIV needs to know immediately so that they take precautions of the highest order with any future sex partners.

Well, I guess if the doc asked me whether I wanted to have my teenagers tested, I'd probably say sure, good idea.

But he hasn't, now I'm thinking like I'll ask him what he thinks about it, you know? I honestly never thought about it before. Well they aren't routinely screened for OTHER STDs unless they have symptoms, right?

I DO have one sexually active teenager, and two more on the brink, tehehe.

Even though we go over the possibilities of disease/pregnancy...well that's PREVENTATIVE. We have very open communication so I'm ASSUMING they'd come to me with issues like that. But you never know, do you?

Thanks for the post. Food for thought.

:)

I agree. I tested my 16 yr old last year after she got a piercing to show her that you can get Hepatitis and I did the HIV one just because. At least she knows she is negative and staying that way is her choice. It's all good.