The headlines say it all: "Warning for doctors after 10-year-old girls are put on pill"; "Doctors prescribe pill for 10-year-olds". But is it really the case, as the papers are suggesting, that doctors routinely prescribe contraceptives for what are, after all, mere children? The study at the heart of the fuss was published in the journal Archives of Disease in Childhood. The aim was to find out how many girls aged 10-16 in Scotland were being prescribed oral contraceptives.

The researchers, from Aberdeen University, traced prescriptions for oral contraceptives made from GPs' surgeries and family planning clinics across Scotland. They concluded: "Despite reportedly high levels of sexual activity and teenage pregnancy in this age group, these results confirm that oral contraceptive pill use is relatively low."

But the study did find that at least two 10-year-olds had been prescribed the pill. In one newspaper, Shona Robison, health spokesman for the Scottish Nationalist party, said she was astounded. "I can't understand for the life of me why any child of this age would be prescribed contraception. It is highly unethical."

Such reactions are not uncommon. But there are several reasons why young girls may be prescribed the pill other than contraception. Girls now start periods early, and heavy or erratic periods at this age are not unknown. The pill is commonly used to treat this, as it usually makes periods lighter and more regular. And we don't know, from this study, whether this was the reason the drug was prescribed. If it was for heavy periods, its use was probably quite reasonable. The fact that the pill also acts as a contraceptive should not stigmatise girls or deny them a treatment that may have made periods more bearable.

In addition, it is possible that computerised records are not always entirely reliable - for example, there may have been confusion between two people with similar names, meaning that the study "found" a girl on the pill when it had actually been mistakenly entered, and, as it says in the study, duplication of some prescriptions being counted twice between GP and family planning clinic may have been possible and artificially inflated the figures.

The study's authors say the UK has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in western Europe, but go on to state that the level of oral contraceptive use in this group is low (they identified 3,296 girls aged 10-16 in Scotland on the pill). Which seems like a clarion call for doctors to prescribe more contraception, not less.

But even with a relatively low pill prescription rate, concern remains about very young girls getting the pill for contraceptive purposes. Should doctors be complicit in this? But such prescriptions are rare; the rate is something in the region of one girl aged under 12 per thousand being prescribed the pill by a GP. And that prescription will not have been made lightly: GPs always advise girls to tell their parent or guardian that they are using contraceptives. In fact, mothers often accompany daughters who are requesting the pill. What's more, any young girl who wants to use the pill for contraceptive purposes is routinely asked about her relationship to ensure that it is not in any way abusive.

So should doctors, as was suggested in some sections of the press, be reporting all sexually active under-13-year-olds as victims of "statutory rape" (as sex in this age group is classed in Scotland)?

Gerard Panting of the Medical Protection Society says the younger the girl, the greater the suspicion must be that she is being manipulated. "Intuitively we feel more concerned at the very young age, and the care of the child is paramount. Although there can be no hard and fast rule, the younger the child, the greater the justification must be for not taking action. If you have someone who is mature at 15, the situation is different."

However, the worst thing that could happen is that young sexually active girls were put off seeing their doctor fearing a breach of confidentiality. Confidentiality is the right of any competent person, and only in circumstances that truly justified it - rape or abuse - would that be broken.