PLANNED Parenthood's emergency contraception van made a trip to the University last week, partially to raise awareness of a bill before the House of Delegates that would have banned Virginia schools from offering the product. The legislation has since been stalled in committee, but there is one type of contraception which the University continues to fail to make readily and inexpensively available: condoms.
As things stand, students without cars have two main on-Grounds options for procuring prophylactics: the Bookstore and the Root Cellar. Bookstore prices are high, while going to the Root Cellar requires asking the cashier for condoms, a potentially embarrassing experience. Whether buying on Grounds or at CVS, condoms are pricey, and some students can't afford to keep a constant supply or simply don't choose to dish out that much money. Furthermore, most unprotected sex involves alcohol; it is unlikely that in the heat of an inebriated moment students will go through the hassle of acquiring a condom.
The argument for why condoms should be readily available is simple: unsafe sex leads to unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. More condoms means less health risk, period. While some conservatives will retort that making condoms accessible encourages reckless behavior, a 2003 study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that high school students were no more likely to engage in sex when condoms were given out freely than when they were hard to procure; additionally, they were far more likely to have safe sex.
Furthermore, if conservatives are worried about an increase in abortions, one need only consider that almost half of all pregnancies are unintended, and nearly half of these lead to abortions. Reducing unintended pregnancies means reducing the number of abortions, which, whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, is a good thing.
The last significant case against making condoms accessible states that abstinence is the only 100 percent effective way to prevent pregnancy and STDs. While this is true, we cannot and should not realistically expect college students to stop having sex. Pragmatically, it must be understood that sex is a facet of the college experience, and safety measures should be taken accordingly. If abstinence literature must be included in order for the University to allow condom distribution, so be it. This is not an abstract game of ideology and religion -- unintended pregnancies and STDs affect students at the University every day.
All of these points come together to answer the inevitable question: Why should students be forced to pay for their classmates' pleasure? First of all, making condoms inexpensively and readily available will not cost the University much: Outside funding is available from groups such as Planned Parenthood, which has indicated its willingness to help through condom drives at college campuses across America. Second, it is not a matter of paying for students to have sex -- it's a matter of paying for students to have safe sex. Safe sex is critical to public health and to not putting a drain on society's resources, and that is something everyone can appreciate.
Condoms need to be easily and cheaply accessible, 24 hours a day. There are any number of ways to offer that service, and many peer institutions already do. Penn State, for example, has a service wherein it offers condoms for 25 cents a piece, and five for a dollar. Additionally, condom dispensing machines can be found in the bathrooms of most Penn State commons. At Columbia, every RA has a box of condoms taped to his or her door. Just an hour and a half down Interstate 64, William & Mary maintains the "fishbowl," a constantly-stocked plate with free condoms for students to walk by and take, no questions asked.
While an open program such as William & Mary's might take a while to come about in the heart of Virginia, easy options for the University include keeping RAs stocked with condoms for their residents; issuing at least one box of condoms to every incoming first-year; giving a supply of condoms to every frat house; subsidizing condom costs at the Bookstore; carrying condoms at the C-Store and Castle in addition to the Root Cellar and Lambeth Store, and not behind the counter.
Any move by the University administration to offer free or subsidized condoms would undoubtedly be met by swift opposition from the right. Nonetheless, this is a case in which President Casteen and the Board of Visitors must strongly consider what is in the best interest of the students. Politics cannot be allowed to trump public health. Faced with an easy way to significantly reduce a major health risk, and one which will not cost the University an appreciable amount, how can it be shrugged off?
If the University fails to act on its own, it falls to the students, and Student Council in particular, to take up the mantle and advocate for the constant accessibility of inexpensive condoms. Planned Parenthood already came to the University with an emergency contraception van; let's hope they never have to come with a condom truck.
Elliot Haspel is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at ehaspel@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 2 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
