Option 1 (-): Ignore the comment made by the friend who is not sexually active and continue as if nothing was said.
Pros: Avoid potential confrontation among friends, maintain peace within the group.
Cons: Risk of friend three potentially having an STI without being aware and continuing to engage in sexual activity, putting themselves and others at risk.
Option 2 (-): Confront friend three about the comment and ask them about the situation at the clinic.
Pros: Friend three can be made aware of the potential risk and can seek medical help if necessary.
Cons: Awkward conversation, potential breach of privacy, damage to friendship dynamics.
Option 3 (+): Encourage friend three to get tested and discuss safe sex practices with the group.
Pros: Promotes open communication about sexual health and safety within the friend group, potentially prevents the spread of STIs.
Cons: Awkward conversation, potential discomfort among friends.
Values to consider include honesty, open communication, health, and safety.
It is most responsible and appropriate to choose option 3 (+) and encourage friend three to get tested and discuss safe sex practices with the group. This decision prioritizes the health and safety of all individuals involved and promotes open communication within the friend group.
After acting on this decision, it is important to reflect on how the conversation went and any changes in behavior that result from it. This can help in future decision-making and maintaining healthy relationships within the friend group.
Four friends of which three are sexually active and one is not. The friend who is not sexually active mentions that they heard friend three’s partner was at the clinic—possibly implying an STI.
Describe the situation that requires a decision.
List Options ( - or +)
Weigh the pros and cons of each possible decision.
Consider your Values
Decide which decision is most responsible and appropriate
Act on your decision and evaluate the results. (Reflection)
1 answer
1 answer