Last Friday the New York Times published an article focusing on the potential health concerns of using two popular oral contraceptives, Yaz and Yasmin. While this information is certainly important and the risks of serious side effects including blood clots and stroke should absolutely be considered when thinking about what type of contraception to use, the article failed to discuss the risk of health issues during pregnancy. Studies have found that 4 to 5 per 100,000 reproductive age women who are not taking birth control pills will develop thrombosis. Among women taking low-dose birth control pills that risk increases to 12 to 20 per 100,000. Among pregnant women the risk is even higher--48 to 60 per 100,000. So when we hear about the increased risks of serious side effects such as blood clots and strokes we need to ask ourselves: "Compared to what?"

In addition to providing us with the scary news, I wish there were more articles about the women, men and families who are thankful for reliable birth control methods such as the pill. A recent report from the Guttmacher Institute found that nearly half of women reported that they wanted to reduce or delay their childbearing because of economic concerns--clearly family planning is as important as ever.

There are lots of other great methods of birth control available, but like anything in life there are trade-offs for each one, and we all have to find the one that fits us best (check out our Birth Control 101 page for more information). While most methods have side effects (and these should be discussed with your doctor), consider the potential alternative--an unplanned pregnancy.

Why do we expect so much more from our birth control pills than from other medications we take?

Upon reading the story in today's NY Times about the recently-found 35,000-year-old figurative sculpture, it occurred to me that we were fighting a lot of instinct in our efforts to have responsible sex.  You see, the figurine emphasizes those attractive parts of the female anatomy: the breasts, the hips, and also included a "greatly enlarged" vulva.

This is from a time when Neanderthals were still roaming the Earth and, perhaps as survival instinct, our desires for procreating were heightened.

It's about the heat of the moment.  It's about NOT leaving decision-making to the heat of the moment because 35,000 years of instinct is hard to overcome.

Please note this day.

The fact that four of ten births in the United States are now out-of-wedlock did not warrant a mention in the New York Times--- the one-time newspaper of record; the newspaper that promises "all the news that's fit to print." The Times had plenty-o-space for a front-page thumb sucker on the thriving economy of Norway (!), there was space for an article on two women switched at birth, there was even space for a lawsuit brought by some disgruntled students because they didn't get the inaugural experience they expected.

Children? Families? Poverty? Fatherhood? No room for you.

To be fair, the Times did have an online piece on the report on nonmarital childbearing that was written by terrific Stephanie Ventura from the National Center for Health Statistics. I guess that reporting significant increases in nonmarital childbearing is now relegated to the ether rather than dead tree land. Pity.

I'm left to wonder...given this indifference from a media table-setting outlet like the Times, why should we be surprised at our nation's exceedingly high rate of unplanned pregnancy?

P.S. If you do want to read a good story on this issue, please read Rob Stein's piece in The Washington Post; or Mike Stobbe of the Associated Press.

There are just a couple days left in the National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Week, but hopefully we won't just forget about this issue by the weekend. You don't think you know any teens affected by dating violence? Don't be so sure. Take a look at just a few of the stats from an enlightening Family Violence Prevention Fund fact sheet to see how prevalent the issue is:

• One in four teen girls in a relationship says she has been threatened with violence or experienced verbal abuse, and 13 percent say they were physically hurt or hit.
  
  
• One in three teens reports knowing a friend or peer who has been hit, punched, kicked, slapped or physically hurt by a partner, and 45 percent of girls know a friend or peer who has been pressured into having sex.
  
  
• One in four teens in a relationship say they have been called names, harassed or put down by their partner through cellphones and texting.

Those of you who read the NYT article we wrote about last week already know that that third bullet point illustrates a category of partner abuse the Family Violence Prevention Fund is now calling "digital dating violence." To help teens identify and stop this type of abuse, which also includes harassment via instant messenger and online social networks, the Fund has partnered with the Ad Council and the USDOJ's Office on Violence Against Women to create That's Not Cool, a site with videos, callout cards, and a place to discuss related topics with their peers.  It's not always easy to tell when online and cell phone behavior shifts from fun and flirty to foul and fear-inducing, but hopefully this site will help teens differentiate between what's acceptable and what's not. 

As part of our ongoing effort to support healthy teen relationships, we've added to StayTeen.org a number of resources related to dating violence. Teens can take a quiz, learn how to spot warning signs of partner violence, discover how to help friends who are being abused, or link to Loveisrespect.org, the site of the National Teen Dating Abuse Helpline, to get even more resources.  Because dating violence shouldn't be a part of any teen's relationship reality. 

Ever since we released the report on our "Sex and Tech" survey last month with CosmoGirl.com, my fellow Campaigners and I have been answering questions from hundreds of reporters who want to get to the bottom (so to speak) of the "sexting" craze.

Our survey found that about 20% of teens have posted or sent nude or semi-nude photos of themselves; and about 30% have received such images meant for someone else. About 3/4 of the teens in our survey acknowledged that this kind of thing is risky and could have negative consequences.

But they're doing it anyway. And now the consequences seem to be more serious even than future embarrassment. Today's New York Times notes the latest example of teens across the country who are being charged with dissemination and possession of child pornography, even when they're sending photos of themselves. That makes for a murky legal situation, and a really scary one to find yourself in.

Countless reporters have asked me if we should just make sure teens only have cell phones without cameras. Have you tried to buy one of those? I'm not sure you can anymore. Besides, it's not the phone's fault. Instead, we need to teach teens how to use technology in a smart and safe way, and how to make sure that something done on a whim or a dare doesn't cost them their futures. Parents remain the most powerful force in teens' lives—and while most parents don't feel like they're experts at technology, they are still experts at being parents.

What would you tell your teen? Have you asked your teen if they know anyone who's done this? Tell us you thoughts and find tips for parents and teens on the Sex and Tech page of our Web site. 

It's like deja vu all over again at The New York Times.  For the second time in the past several weeks the grey lady is red in the face over virginity.  Today's entry: purity balls.  (See previous postings on the topic here and here.) 

Leaving aside everything else one might say about these father-daughter purity balls, I am left wondering--like so many others---where are the purity balls for fathers and their sons.  Don't these father-daughter gatherings underscore the sexual double standard still alive and still well---the double standard that tells young women to say "no" and young men to be "careful." 

Check out some polling data on this topic here (charts 5, 15, and 16)---65% of teens and 61% of parents of teens agree that parents send one message about sex to their sons and an altogether different message to their daughters.  Not too good.

So, the New York Times has discovered virginity.  In the Sunday magazine article by Randall Patterson, we read about "ivy league virginity" (not to be confused with virginity among less well bred plants).  Question: would this article have been written about a virginity club at LSU or Ohio State?  Or is the core idea of this piece that people at Harvard should be too worldly wise--too smart!!!--to even consider restraint?  

Mind you, abstaining until marriage seems to be beyond rare; fewer than 5 percent of brides are virgins on their wedding day (silence reigns on the grooms, of course--nudge nudge, wink wink).  But is it really newsworthy  that a few young adults at Harvard and other exalted schools see room for taking sex and love a bit more seriously than so much of our culture suggests?  The "wait til marriage" message might be hard for some to stomach, of course, especially given the rising age of marriage and the increase in co-habitation.  But there is a moderate middle in all this.

The real club that I think we need is one that gives voice to a commonsense, centrist view -- that sex has risks and meaning along with real potential for intimacy, and that it belongs in committed relationships not one night stands.  What shall we call this new club at Harvard?  Any nominations?  And once it is formed, will the NYT write about it?