In most colleges, free condoms are ready for the taking. In a Jesuit university, however, things are evidently a little different. In order to uphold Catholic moral teaching on the subject, Loyola has a strict ban on providing contraceptives, including condoms, to students. While the reasons behind this policy are clear and understandable, the ban itself proves impractical and, in effect, a detriment to students and their health.
The reality of university life is that students are having sex, often with numerous partners. Frequently, students who engage in sexual activity underestimate the risk of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and, thus, neglect proper protection. When these conditions are combined with the inescapable presence of sexually transmitted infections on campus, it is certain that the physical health of students is vulnerable.
In such a setting, the university-wide ban on contraceptives sends the wrong message, augmenting the threat students face. Although the ban certainly does not encourage unsafe sex, it does dissuade students from paying due attention to protection. By remaining silent on the issue, the university allows students to ignore the consequences of unsafe sex. As such, the ban is not only impractical, but can also be potentially damaging to the wellbeing of the student body.
This effect necessarily brings into question the role of Student Health Services. While housed in a Jesuit university, the express and fundamental purpose of Student Health Services is to protect the health of students, not to espouse Catholic moral teaching. If the service is to properly protect all aspects of a student’s health, it must also be able to address the health risks of unprotected sex.
In order to do this, Student Health Services must be able to provide students with adequate resources, including condoms and other contraceptives, to prevent STDs. It seems only reasonable, then, that the university’s clinic should have independent purview over contraceptives, an issue that is necessarily intertwined with the health of sexually active students. Refusing to do so is a disservice to students and a threat to their health.
It is impossible to ignore the issue of sex, particularly in a university setting. Sex is a fact of life at college, and it will always be present on campus. By refusing to offer contraceptives, even within the confines of Student Health Services, Loyola is ignoring the reality of sexually active students – and the pregnancy and STD risk they carry – on campus.
We are a Jesuit university, but we are not immune to the same pressures that lead other universities to offer contraceptive options. Students at Loyola need an alternative to the current ban on condoms and other forms of birth control. While contraceptives should not play a prominent role in university services, there should be at least one place on campus allowed to address the issue when necessary, simply to protect the health of the student population.
