Abstinence Only : Harmful And Against The First Amendment

In 1913, sex education became a topic that was found to be an important education tool. Since then, this form of education has been a hot and debatable topic among many Americans. The original reason for sex education classes was to reduce problems such as sexually transmitted illnesses and prostitution. In recent years, abstinence has become the focus of sex education curriculum. Abstinence means refraining from sex completely. Although, it is the only one-hundred percent way to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies, abstinence-only instruction should not be the only form of sex education taught. Our youth need to know about all aspects of sex. This intails how to protect them if they choose to become sexually

While in high school, most teenagers between the ages 13-17, will have attended at least one sex education class. Instead of using the “Abstinence- Only” approach, schools should consider on teaching students the “Safe- Sex” approach to increase their knowledge on potential health risks involving sex. Increasing their knowledge not only increases their awareness, but lets them use their knowledge in the real world and let them form their own decisions, whether they be bad or good.

Since the HIV/AIDS epidemic began in the U.S. in the early 1980s the issue of sex education for American youth has had the attention of the nation. There are about 400,000 teen births every year in the U.S, with about 9 billion in associated public costs. STI contraction in general, as well as teen pregnancy, have put the subject even more so on the forefront of the nation’s leading issues. The approach and method for proper and effective sex education has been hotly debated. Some believe that teaching abstinence-only until marriage is the best method while others believe that a more comprehensive approach, which includes abstinence promotion as well as contraceptive information, is necessary. Abstinence-only program curriculums disregard

“Don’t have sex because you will get pregnant and die!” (Mean Girls). This famous quote said by Coach Carr, the health teacher, in the movie Mean Girls swarms the brains of teenagers all over the world. While this quote is quite extreme and is making a mockery of abstinence only programs, it’s analogous to what teachers across the nation are reciting to brainwash our youth. Abstinence-Until-Marriage programs are implemented in numerous high school and junior high schools across the country. While the title seems promising, “Mathematica [Policy Research Inc. (on behalf of U. S. Department of Health and Human Services) found that through] evaluation, [there’s] no evidence that abstinence-until-marriage programs increased rates of sexual abstinence” (What the Research Says…). Teaching a course that isn’t beneficial is meaningless and merely a waste of time. These curriculums use fear tactics to scare children away from sex, reinforce gender norms, and provide inaccurate medical information. Schools that provide abstinence only programs are denying our youth factual, substantial knowledge and survival skills. Instead, these schools should consider an abstinence-plus program, also known as a safe sex contraception education, for their students.

Drilling into teens’ heads that sex is inherently bad will do no justice in the long run. Notwithstanding, abstinence-only programs do nothing but this, for they hold the opinion that making teenagers fear the consequences of precarious sex will prevent them from engaging in it. Advocates of both abstinence-only and comprehensive programs are worried that premature sex, even when wholly safe, will psychologically damage teenagers, but “there are no scientific data suggesting that consensual sex between adolescents is harmful”, yet abstinence-only education by itself continues to mandate the teaching that sex out of wedlock will do harm (Santelli et al. “Abstinence and abstinence-only education” 74). Unlike abstinence-only education, comprehensive sex-education attempts to focus on developing healthy mentalities for the benefit of their students. Promotion of healthy relationships between oneself and others will help make teenagers find trust between themselves and their sexual partners before participating in the act, furthermore causing them to make sure their partner does not have any STIs and is using contraception. Conversely, abstinence-only programs’ persistence with enthusiastically promoting abstinence leaves teenagers with little clue about their mental health. “Even those few individuals who remain abstinent until marriage are left

Policies should be put in place to make the young adults better educated, in all areas of physical intimacy. Under the abstinence-only approach students are given no information about contraception, and other ways of preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. We should educate the best habits of prevention, and state that abstinence is the best way to prevent unplanned pregnancy or the spread of STD’s.

Abstinence only education has been the most prevalent form of instruction in middle and high school courses for years in the United States. Instead of providing accurate scientific facts, it has been primarily based on ideology and what has been traditionally morally accepted: sexual activity within a heterosexual marriage. As a result, teenagers have been taught through biased information influenced by current heteronormative standards. Consequently, abstinence only education fails to acknowledge the minority populations of teenaged students who are different genders and sexualities other than a heterosexual male. Realistically, it can be inferred that a majority of the student bodies in America are rich in diversity. The classroom is no longer composed of homogenous individuals. Instead, classrooms are full of adolescents of various genders, sexualities, ages, and ethnicities. Abstinence only education strictly instructs through biological and reproductively compatible terms rather than addressing other methods of having sex, specifically pertaining to the LGBTQ community. The current curricula typically teaches that penile-vaginal sex is the “proper” way to have intercourse and that it is customary that sex occurs only between a man and a woman. Thus, emphasizing how genitalia should be used rather than having a more holistic approach towards sex. Ultimately, this disregards all of the possible mechanisms that exist when it comes to physical touch. As a consequence,

First of all, in 1996, the government of the United States of America approved a law giving money to states that offered abstinence-only courses in community or public schools. Since this period, more than a million dollars has been provided to states to indorse abstinence-only curriculums and to receive the funding, schools have to reach an agreement to adhere to a strict set of rules. For example, the students attending the class must be told that there is a likelihood that they will likely catch some type of disease if they have sexual intercourse before marriage.

Reports display that abstinence-only curriculums do not decrease sexual intercourse by adolescent students. The United States Division of Health and Human Services publicized a report of abstinence curriculums. The authors revealed that conclusions from the study provided no indication that abstinence curriculums applied in elementary and middle schools are successful in decreasing the rate of adolescent or teenagers having sexual relations. Actually, teenagers did not benefit from all of the work and the millions of dollars that have been used into these curriculums. An additional study by Peter Bearman of Columbia University shows that over eighty-five percent of middle and high school students who vow to remain virgins until

After addressing that abstinence-only education alienates students of various sexualities and genders, I will point out some of the possible consequences that could occur because of this to promote the importance of incorporating comprehensive sex education in middle/high schools. Specifically, I note that during “puberty is when a majority of adolescents participate in sexual encounters”. Therefore, teenaged students who do not conform into traditional heteronormative identities that learn about their reproductive health from an exclusive, heterosexual point of view, are more likely to contract STIs, HIV, and have unintended pregnancies. To prevent teens from these minority populations from facing harmful health consequences, it’s important to spread awareness on treatments, medication, contraception, and places to receive medical attention on all sexual matters.

Sexual education and the methods we should use to get the point across has been debated heavily in the past few years. There are many issues within this broad topic, such as the fact that only 13 states mandate that the information given be medically accurate, and 4 states require that within a sexual education course, sexual orientation be spoken about in a negative manner. However, the overlying problem is abstinence-only (also known as level 3) sexual education. Abstinence-only sexual education is not substantial enough as a system because it fails to inform young people of the real risks that can be taken, and how to counteract these risks.

Almost every young American has had some sort of sexual education— whether it be an in-depth program, or just a mandatory slideshow— having to sit through a sex ed. class is a rite of passage. But does the education we receive here in the U.S. really teach us what we need to know, with an “abstinence-only”— that is, not having sex until marriage— approach being the primary teaching of this educational course? The American method of instructing teenagers and young adults that abstinence is the only way to safely handle sexual education is detrimental to our country as a whole, and would be better replaced by a more comprehensive program. Teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection

Sex is considered a private thing not to be discussed in this day and age. However, with the age that people start having consensual sex getting younger and younger each day. There is clearly a need to have a straight dialogue with young people of each new generation about sex, the dangers, and repercussions of having sex before marriage. The type of sex education we are proposing is a comprehensive sex education. In this paper we will outline the best way we found to incorporate a comprehensive sexual abstinence education into your school, what is it, and why we think it’s important to have a secure sex education program.

One of the best ways to stay safe is to wait until after marriage before being sexually active, this will also decrease the rate of disease. According to the Center of Disease Control in 2010 “about 65 % of STD’s contracted this year will occur in people under the age of 24”. Abstinence-Only Education focuses on the risks to avoid and help youth so that they would not be vulnerable to harm. The program teaches teenagers to wait before having sex until after marriage and remaining faithful afterward is the best choice for physical health and a healthy, happier relationship. Abstinence-Only Education educates us about the realities of STD’s and the best way to prevent them.

It seems as long as people have been having sex the rule has been wait until marriage. But in today’s society that ideal has been challenged. As people become more open about their sexuality and asking why staying a virgin is such a big social construct, especially amongst women. Abstinence I believe is a outdated construct, waiting for the right person, being responsible about protection and not basing someone’s worth on if they are a virgin or not.