SOME ALARMING statistics are coming in from different sources on the high-risk behaviour of increasingly younger children. According to a national Knowledge, Attitude, Behaviour and Practice (KABP) study conducted by the Ministry of Health, the average age for engaging in first sexual activity is 13 for boys and 14 for girls. Yet the age of consent is 16.
Furthermore, the percentage of children who are willing to delay the initiation of sexual activity is declining, as indicated by comparison of 1996 and 2000 KABP data. The risk of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, including the deadly AIDS, and public education about these risks have had little impact on the trend.
Meanwhile Dr. Ken Garfield Douglas of the UWI Faculty of Medical Sciences is reporting significant increase in the use of ganja by adolescents between 1987 and 1997. Over that decade, use of ganja by adolescents has jumped from 19.8 per cent to 26.9 per cent. Another worrying trend which the medical research has picked up is the increasing inhalation of glues, thinners and similar household and office products by children for getting 'high'. A bit of good news is that alcohol and tobacco use have shown some decline.
The patterns of early sexual activity and of drug abuse are worrying to the authorities but should be of deep concern to all of us. We are looking at trends that must affect the health and well-being of the entire society.
Spokespersons for public agencies engaged with the problem such as the National Family Planning Board and the National Council on Drug Abuse are often quick to identify ignorance as a root cause of the problem. It is not at all likely that children know less now than they did a decade or more ago about the risks of sex and drugs.
Further declines in attitudes and values in a society which is traditionally sexually loose, accommodating of ganja and soft drugs and nonchalant about danger and risk offer a far better explanation. How to reverse those socially destructive trends is the big question of the moment.
The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner.
