When I was a teen, my mother talked to me about sex. NOT for the first time, not by any stretch. There was no single "Talk" in my life, more like an ongoing conversation. My mother, a nurse, was the last thing from prudish, and had given me clear and age-appropriate information as long as I can remember.
This conversation, too, was age-appropriate. I was a teen and likely to become sexually active in the near future. We talked about contraception, and when the time came, with my mother's input and guidance, I went on the pill.
That was thirty years ago.
I now have three sexually active kids, two of whom are girls. Are the girls on the pill? No. Do I want them to be? Nowhere is the difference between 1970-something and 2000-something made more clear than in my answer to that question.
When I was a teenager, the worse consequence of sex would be an unwanted pregnancy. Any nasty little infection you might pick up if you were stupid/unlucky could be treated with a round of antibiotics.
That was then.
Now the consequences of inadequate protection are not just inconvenient or even life-altering: they could be life-destroying. And the pill no longer constitutes "protection", not against AIDS. If my girls had only a pill between them and pregnancy, that would mean they had nothing between them and a whole lot worse. If they are on the pill, my fear would be that they would become less consistent with the condoms.
So. Do I want my girls on the pill? No, I do not.
How about you? Let's set aside for now the question of whether they 'should' be having sex at all, or whether or not you approve of teen sex. If you have sexually active teens, particularly girls, how do you feel about the pill as protection?