Madam, - It seems to be all or nothing with several of your readers. Mrs D. Bourke's (January 5th), responding to my letter of December 22nd, thinks "promotion of condoms as a way to stop the transmission of STIs [sexually transmitted infections\] is grossly irresponsible". But surely being almost completely protected from STIs is better than not being protected at all.
"A spouse," Mrs Bourke says, is an example of a "faithful, uninfected partner" , which is the only 100 per cent protection from contracting an STI. Yes, the world would be such a wonderful, carefree place if all of God's people abstained from sex until they were married. Unfortunately for the world, humans don't work like that.
It seems it is wrong for parents to accept that the world is not always as we would like it to be, and not to dress up harsh realities for the sake of our children.
Perhaps we parents have some more growing up to do ourselves. We might as well wake up, smell the pheromones and have a chat with our teenagers about sex in a grown-up manner. Ireland is not, nor has it ever been, free from sexual diseases or unwanted/unplanned pregnancies.
However, Mrs Bourke is wholly correct in saying that "people, especially parents of the young and vulnerable, have the right to know the truth about condoms". Condoms are not perfect, nor did I ever say they were. I retract my claim that condoms were 99 per cent effective in preventing conception and contraction of an STI. They are in fact 98 per cent effective (according to Durex.com) - and the best current first line of first defence against STIs. - Yours, etc.,
HOLLY FAWCETT, Leixlip, Co Kildare.