No sexual safety on campus

No sexual safety on campus

UVU stopped giving out condoms on March 1 due to germs and low demand. Gilbert Cisneros/UVU Review

Yes, students can still have sex, but UVU will no longer provide the condoms to keep it safe.

 

UVU’s Health and Wellness center has stopped offering its students access to contraceptives as of March 1, 2012. After much discussion regarding the government possibly cutting funding for contraceptives, contraceptives have been made unavailable to the student body.

 

The Wellness Center is nonprofit, but the 2011 – 2012 Student Affairs Operating Budget shows that an allocated amount of $613,888 goes to Student Health Services, which is one of the largest portions of the operating budget.

 

The director of the SHS department, William Erb, had this statement regarding why this service has been stopped: “The Mission of Student Health Services is to provide services and education that will promote and ensure health within the student body.

 

The provision of education and prophylactics has been a part of SHS for many years. Many forms of birth control are available at SHS upon request. SHS is continually reviewing each service we offer to students in an effort to maximize the impact of our goal to promote health.”

 

However, when students went to the SHS office a week after this statement was made to see if they could get condoms, they were turned away and told that the service is no longer offered.

 

One employee at the center, who asked to remain anonymous, said, “I would say about half of the students use them, maybe a little less than half.”

 

Another member of the staff, who also wanted to remain anonymous, said the reason why contraceptives have been made unavailable to students said that it was due to “poor distribution.”

 

This service has not been requested a lot, per se, but if it is a matter of “poor distribution” then it should be made available upon request.

 

“As we reviewed this service we found that it was used infrequently,” Erb said in his statement. “We also found that a few students would come in and take multiple handfuls. We were noticing that this service would go unused for days then one or two students would come in and take over half of the contents in the container.”

 

This does not exactly conform to previous statements made by employees of the department stating that “around half the students” that came in used them. This also conflicts with the following statement where Erb talks about the need to clean the jar daily, despite it going unused for a day or two.

 

“Another issue was that an open container, in a health center lobby, where multiple hands are accessing the same jar increases the risk of passing on sickness,” Erb said in the statement. “We clean our furniture and magazines but effectively disinfecting this jar was far from possible or practical. SHS is continuing this service. At the same time, we would like to ensure that we are using student funds appropriately and effectively within the center.”

 

So there may be two different arguments that contradict each other. They need to clean for the many students or there are too few students that need them.

 

Despite either argument, the fact remains that now students will have to provide their own condoms.

 

By Clay Neville
Staff Writer

17 Responses to "No sexual safety on campus"

  1. Adelaide   April 2, 2012 at 2:26 pm

    Men do NOT like to use condoms, and quite frankly, most women don’t either. This means that the few men that take condoms from SHS, have probably never had sex, but are hoping to, and the few men that take handfuls of condoms, are probably trying to look like they have sex a lot, but really have no real use for any of them either. Most people that swing, or have sex with multiple partners responsibly, are tested regularly, and only sleep with others who are tested regularly.

    Those who are responsible & use condoms regularly, know of other means to get them, free.

    SHS isn’t the only facility that offers free condoms. There are several others including, but not limited to, Planned Parenthood.

    Typically the responsibility regarding birth control, is left to the woman. Hence, SHS offers contraceptives for women

    Better to cut condoms than other means of birth control.

    Reply
  2. Jason   April 2, 2012 at 5:28 pm

    the condoms in SHS are terrible. They feel, quote “like a trash bag.” However, the health department in downtown Provo offers free, lubricated condoms.

    Reply
  3. H. Rae   April 2, 2012 at 8:55 pm

    I think people are missing the bigger point. . .it’s very odd that at the same time right wing political extremists across this nation are trying to get rid of women’s rights, including discrimination free access to contraception and abortion, that UVU “coincidentally” stops providing free contraception. I would hope that an institute of higher education has stronger convictions and the health and welfare of their students as a priority, versus pandering politically to potential donors.

    Reply
  4. Matthew VanUitert   April 14, 2012 at 1:20 am

    H. Rae, I actually think YOU are missing the bigger point. It is not odd at all that those “right wing political extremists” want women (and men) to pay the costs for their own contraception. What right do you have to force me to pay for your contraception or abortion? By not providing these products for free the only thing UVU is doing is not pandering to the whiners who won’t shell out a dollar for a condom. (And BTW you walk into the SHS center and ask them about contraceptive options and they’ll help you out. This article wasn’t well researched. Full of conflicting statements the “writer” didn’t bother to figure out before going to press. Like how I walked in and asked about the free condoms the week after this was printed and I was told they were ordered and would be offered behind the counter as soon as they arrived. Pathetic to pretend this B.S. is journalism.)

    Reply
  5. Paul Rossen   April 17, 2012 at 9:16 pm

    That Matthew kid is obviously a virgin first off. Secondly, If you feel that it was such bad journalism, maybe you should get an article in the paper. The only thing that is “pathetic to pretend” is that you know anything about journalism, or a well researched article. Grow up and do something more productive with your time.

    Reply
  6. Sher   April 19, 2012 at 10:37 am

    Matt, what right does anyone have asking me to pay for their welfare for their 7 kids they couldn’t afford a condum to prevent. Wake up and look beyond someone else’s ••••• to the long term reprocussion of unexpected or unwanted pregnancies. You and your right winged buddies can continue to pay into the welfare system because giving someone a free condum appears that sex is being used for purposes other than procreation. Newsflash, it IS being used for enjoyment! In the name of Jesus Christ Amen!

    Reply
  7. Matthew VanUitert   April 22, 2012 at 9:57 pm

    Actually Paul, no. Not that its any of your business or has ANY bearing on what I wrote. I appreciate that you first decided to try ridiculing me before before refuting any of the points I made. You’re obviously a very accomplished debater since you found it unnecessary to even try. You must have really got me good with that virgin comment. Shucky darns. So I’ll just hang out until you try and explain why an article that claims no more condom distribution was refuted in 30 seconds by walking in and asking about them? And I actually wrote in to the paper and got a response from the author on facebook. We’re having a dialogue about what I see as shortcomings and should he provide some satisfactory answers that can be laid to rest. So how about YOU do something better with your time? Like *shrug* I don’t know, try debating my points instead of blowing them off?

    Reply
  8. Matthew VanUitert   April 22, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    Sher. My answer? None. No one has a right to a welfare check, except those persons injured and/or handicapped serving their cities, states, or nation in performing dangerous work. (Cops, soldiers, firefighters etc.)

    Why does someone (who refuses to pay a few dollars for a condom) (Yes its spelled condom, not condum), suddenly have a right to hundreds of dollars a month out of your pocket? To protect their 7 children? Did this person not learn from their first child that a few dollars for a condom now is easier than working hard to raise the kid on their own? Oh wait, they don’t have to work, they get welfare checks. Silly me.

    Look Sher. I don’t care if you or anyone else has sex for fun. I don’t. But in that context, sex is recreational and personal and enjoyed between two people. But the consequences thereof are paid for by everyone. Does that seem right?

    Reply
  9. Sher   April 23, 2012 at 10:35 am

    @Matthew VanUitert. Thanks for pointing out my spelling error. CONDOM! Now, since we are ignoring the article completely, “Look Sher.” is not a complete sentence, and I’m not sure “shucky” is a word. I can only feel sorry for you regarding your views on sex. It is not bad, or dirty or evil. It is a normal human behavior and if you don’t find it enjoyable then you have been brainwashed beyond repair. In case you missed my point before, FREE CONDOMS FOR EVERYONE AT UVU! If you don’t want one, fine, but let those sexually responsible students use the service. Unfortunately, students don’t get to choose where their madatory student fees go. Each time you pay your fees, feel good that you have contributed to another student’s healthy decision. You aren’t funding the orgy you think you are.

    Reply
  10. Sher   April 23, 2012 at 10:38 am

    @Matthew VanUitert – I know, MANDATORY.

    Reply
  11. Matthew VanUitert   April 25, 2012 at 10:30 pm

    @Sher. Thanks for correcting my english. I appreciate it. As for the rest where did you get the idea that I think sex is “bad, or dirty or evil.” ? Did I say that? Did I say that anywhere? Nope. You presume I think that is my opinion because I think people should pay for their own condoms? That’s a bit of a stretch. Each time I pay my, already too high student fees, I would rather think of the new science building that finally got built. I notice you didn’t answer my question. Should what is enjoyed by two be paid for by everyone else? Should the school pay for my motorcycle helmet? Or that of another person riding with me? That’s an optional recreational activity being enjoyed by two people, why shouldn’t it be subsidized? You get after me for a presumed bias against sex, you assume I don’t enjoy it, you presume I think its evil. But after all this, you have yet to explain why…

    Reply
  12. Matthew VanUitert   April 25, 2012 at 10:36 pm

    @Sher Continued — it is so sacred as to require a subsidy by my tuition fees. What is it about sex that makes it worthy of my tuition for others to enjoy? Yes it is a normal human behavior, yes it is enjoyable, but it is not mandatory, it is optional. Not only is it optional, but the provision of condoms is not a major financial burden to a single individual (or an intimate couple if they care enough about each other to practice safe sex). If it were, that individual is probably in a dire enough financial situation to disqualify recreational sex from their budget. So you’ll forgive me if I call you out on your attempts to insult me and “strawman” my argument with assumptions about my views and claim victory in this little discussion. Because after all your ranting, you’ve yet to provide a reason why condoms deserve my student fees or why any point I made is wrong. Have a nice day…

    Reply
  13. David   May 16, 2012 at 12:09 pm

    The total cost of maintaining the Students Services: $613,888.
    This is probably similar to the cost of raising a child from 0-18 in a best case scenario, with a poor education, few doctor’s visists, and a wardrobe that is sure to cause damaging mental anguish (thats life).
    You’re right the cost of the condom is not that significant, and I think we can all agree that people can be intelligent, or less so, and still make poor decisions. I have to say that ineveitably I am going to pay for someone elses mistake, whether its a drunk driver killing a family member or and unwanted pregnancy.
    Prevention is a fraction of the cost of Resolution after the fact, not to mention that it will most likely produce a citizen who is lacking in critical thinking abilities to choose to use a contraceptive in the heat of the moment.

    Reply
  14. Matthew VanUitert   May 24, 2012 at 8:57 pm

    Prevention is the best case. When someone doesn’t make that decision though society shouldn’t have to carry the cost. Insulating people from their mistakes doesn’t help the situation. So yeah, let people make their own decisions and let them deal with the consequences.

    Reply
    • David   May 25, 2012 at 4:30 pm

      I don’t want to have to be subject to gravity either but since we can’t change gravity or the obvious impact of stupid people procreating then maybe we can provide some free condoms and cross our fingers?

      Reply
      • Matthew VanUitert   May 31, 2012 at 12:30 pm

        If a charity wants to provide those things from voluntary donations go for it. I personally don’t think it helps and so I prefer my money not be relegated to that task without my consent.

        Reply
        • David   June 2, 2012 at 10:35 am

          Thats an interesting point of veiw Matthew. I think you have converted me, please read the following:
          http://blogs.uvu.edu/blog/2011/08/who-exactly-pays-for-uvu/
          Now I was thinking maybe you could find a charity to fund your education, because I certainly don’t think it will help and I don’t appreciate my money being relegated to this task without my personal consent.

          Reply

Leave a Reply