Today, young people in Jamaica are fighting hard to protect their sexual and reproductive health and rights. For years, the actions of this country have been defined by a tenuous fear that providing young people access to condoms would encourage promiscuity. Despite huge controversy and tension, the government of Jamaica is finally realizing that allowing this fear to dictate policies and programs for young people is incredibly destructive to their health and well being, and a violation of their human rights…although, not everybody is excited about this new development.

Over the last two weeks the public discourse around these issues has been pretty heated in Jamaica. For those of you who don’t quite what is going on, here is the low down (in a slightly condensed version).

As explained in the Gleaner article published on May 7, the Ministry of Education, in collaboration with the Ministry of Health and National HIV/STI Programme and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria, distributed an advertisement calling for plans to “develop a referral mechanism for sexually-active students to access sexual and reproductive health services outside of the formal school setting.” This plan would still prohibit contraceptive access and distribution in schools (another source of heated debate), it would just allow for a network of trained guidance counselors, teachers and peer educators to inform students about where they can get condoms on their own.

This is a huge step for Jamaica, and as such, Jamaican youth activists have praised the Ministry for finally paying attention to young people’s sexual and reproductive rights in an article they published in The Gleaner, one of Jamaica’s most prominent newspapers.
 
And so the heated debate began.
 
In response to the praise granted to the Ministry of Education, Esther Tyson, principal of a well respected high school in St. Andrew, Jamaica published an opinion piece of her own in a subsequent edition of The Gleaner. In her piece, she argued that this system will only perpetuate the problems of Jamaica and not resolve anything.

In addition to the fact that a lot of the information she included in her op-ed was misconstrued and inaccurate, the biggest problem around this article is that people are reading it. If you read her article, and I recommend that you do, you will see that her arguments are flawed and often irrelevant, but they appeal to the masses because they focus on issues of morality and social values. Consequently, this article serves to amplify the voice of a woman who does not respect the right of young people to comprehensive sexual health, by sending faulty messages that since condoms will not completely solve any of Jamaica’s problems they should not be provided.

For example, Tyson claims that “condoms cannot protect the youth from being infected by the human papilloma virus (HPV).” This statement is incorrect. According to a “28 month study of 123 college women, researchers found that sexually active women who used condoms consistently were significantly less likely to contract HPV than were women who had not used condoms.” (Advocates for Youth Condom Effectiveness Fact Sheet) Also, she attempts to devalue a statistic that 100% correct and consistent use of condoms reduces the risk of HPV contraction by 50%, implying that this makes condoms ineffective against HPV. Um, considering that condoms were not created to prevent against HPV, preventing 50% of cases is pretty significant.

Basically, Tyson’s article manipulates the facts to make it seem like condoms are not a complete solution to any of societies most important problems and thus should not be part of any solution at all. Distracting the reader from the main purpose of the referral system and condom use in general, her strategy is to focus on what condoms don’t do (because they’re not intended to), like solve problems of sexual abuse in Jamaica (see article). The frightening thing is, this tactic can be successful in swaying the public from a embracing a human rights perspective to personal opinions on morality.

As was explained in JYAN’s response in the Gleaner, “this is not an issue of what condoms do and don't do - this is an issue of young people's rights to information and to health. By making these claims, Tyson is effectively advocating against the inherent right of Jamaican youth to protect themselves against harmful diseases and unintended pregnancies.” Tyson's proposal will not only deny young people their right to access condoms, but violate young people's right to be informed and empowered to make responsible decisions about their sexual and reproductive health.

To the youth of Jamaica: Keep fighting for your rights, your voices are being heard. Fight on!