One of the less talked about issues for many University students is sexually transmitted diseases or infections among college students — an issue related to sex education, as we wrote about earlier this week. At the University, STI screenings are relatively accessible and, it appears, taken advantage of by the student body, though there is always room for improvement when it comes to the promotion of sexual health.
First, it is important to understand what STI screenings are. An STI screening is a test for someone who has no visible symptoms, and includes tests for chlamydia, gonorrhea and HIV, as well as syphilis or possibly hepatitis in high-risk situations, according to Dr. Christine M. Peterson, director of the Gynecology Clinic at the Elson Student Health Center. Such screenings are not comprehensive — notably, herpes is not included in this list.
While STI screenings don’t cover all areas of sexual health, they are still a good place to start. But one element of STI screenings that can be cumbersome is the question of cost. Student Health does not provide free STI screenings, and it seems unlikely that this will happen in the future. According to Dr. Peterson, Student Health doesn’t have the budget to do so, since lab tests are costly and Student Health receives no money from the state or the University, but is instead supported by student fees. The upside to the situation is, of course, that insurance policies — which the University mandates students to have — should cover the cost of STI screenings, as required by the Affordable Care Act. But this gets complicated with the cost of deductibles and different policies that may apply to international students.
Another barrier, Peterson says, “is that many students are covered by their parents’ insurance.” For these students, getting tested is also a question of parental involvement — something that suggests free, or low-cost (and not insurance-based) testing, may be helpful.
Despite cost and familial obstacles, students appear to get STI screenings in significant numbers. In her department of Student Health, Peterson estimates between 1,000-2,000 students get tested per year, strong numbers considering not all students choose to get tested at Student Health and may go elsewhere. (Peterson also noted that, of the women tested, those who tested positively for an STI were largely consistent with the national average.)
It appears University students do not contract STIs in larger numbers than students at other schools, and that there is a strong population of students knowledgeable enough about STIs to seek appropriate information. This is likely furthered by Student Health’s marketing about STI screenings, included not only on the Student Health website but also in places like the Stall Seat Journal and through Peer Health Educators. Although we may be doing well comparatively, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t seek more ways to promote screenings and subsidies to make them more affordable. According to Peterson, “We do understand that testing is very expensive, and we are working extremely hard to find a source of inexpensive testing for people who don’t want to use their insurance.”
Some kind of subsidy would certainly alleviate some of these issues, and this could come in the form of grants or donations — or funding from the University outside what’s allocated through student fees. While members of Student Health seek to address this issue, it is certainly laudable that many students and health administrators seem invested in sexual health.
Read More
KAVITHA: U.Va. must strengthen efforts to combat opioid overdose in the community
By Gayathri Kavitha | 3 days agoAddiction crises should be understood as communal, rather than individual.
EDITORIAL: Signing off from the 135th term
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoAt the end of our term, we thought it fitting to share with you which of our 28 editorials have been our favorites.
WILLIAMS: From deepfakes to ChatGPT, AI can ruin us
By Ryan Williams | December 16, 2024It is crucial for us to reevaluate our personal reliance on AI and begin understanding how it acts as a problematic shortcut.
