Abstinence Only Education Essay

While sexual education is mandatory in almost all secondary schools across Australia, the level of depth at which it is taught varies throughout every school. Many highly important areas of sex ed, such as learning about consent, contraceptive options and violence in relationships, are less commonly taught in high school, with puberty typically being the prime topic taught in PDHPE lessons instead. But when we look at the increase in things such as sexual assault, sexual violence, Sexually Transmitted Infections and teenage pregnancy among today’s youth, we must wonder why such imperative subjects to educate teenagers on are discussed so minimally.

People such as President George W. Bush has made no secret of his view that sex education should teach teenagers "abstinence only" rather than including information on other ways to avoid sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. Unfortunately, despite spending more than $10 million on abstinence-only programs in Texas alone, this strategy has not been shown to be effective at curbing teen pregnancies or halting the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. (2010 Union of Concerned Scientists) In addition, the Bush administration distorted science-based performance measures to test whether abstinence-only programs were proving effective, such as charting the birth rate of female program participants. In place of such established measures, the Bush administration required the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to track only participants' program attendance and attitudes, measures designed to obscure the lack of efficacy of abstinence-only programs. (Federal Register 65:69562-65, November 17, 2000). This

Abstinence is the only form of birth control that is 100% effective – in both preventing pregnancies and most sexually transmitted infections. If you choose to be abstinent, then you have decided not to have any type of sexual relations. Learn some of the reasons why people choose to abstain as well as the benefits from this behavior. Discover the difference between continuous and complete abstinence. Read advice on how to stay abstinent and when to make the decision about using abstinence as your contraceptive method. Possible pitfalls people face when choosing this method are also examined.

In 2005, nearly half of all high school students have had sexual intercourse. Plainly stating that abstinence programs do not work (USA Today). Abstinence programs were beneficial many years ago, but since they are ineffective in delaying teen pregnancy, then teen pregnancy rate has increased. Abstinence programs teach the “no sex until marriage” clause, but they don’t teach teens about birth control and the consequences of having sex at before they’ve matured. Although many studies argue that abstinence programs are educational and beneficial, other studies will show that they don’t delay teen sex, they don’t prevent the spread of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), and are a waste of taxpayers’

The United States of America is known for many of its outlandish and outrageous statistics in comparison to other countries. Statistics regarding obesity, homicide rates, and political issues have displayed many of the nation?s weak points. However, the amount of teen pregnancy has become so excessive that it is becoming a cry for help and a statistic that is greatly standing out and can no longer be ignored. In 1999 about one million teenagers experienced a pregnancy. This rate was twice the amount in England, Wales, and Canada and nine times greater than that of the Netherlands and Japan. About 78% of these American teenage pregnancies were said to be unplanned.

The issue of the paper Misinformed and Unprotected is that Abstinence-only programs lack to inform teens about sexual contact because the system is current set up as only teaching teens to not have sexual contact till marriage, leaving out important information for teens who what to learn how to be safe with sexual contact. The writer’s position on the paper is that the education system should be changed to inform teens more than just wait till marriage to have sex. The evidence list is that Abstinence-only education advocates claim that abstinence-only programs prevent premarital sex, but that the programs need to stop being publicly funded because these programs may make those who have suffered from sexual abuse feel ashamed and unwilling

One major problem in America’s society today is teen pregnancy rates. In fact, “teen sexual activity, pregnancy, and childbearing are associated with substantial social, economic, and health costs” (Sedgwick). However, this problem is not one without a solution. The rise of teen pregnancy rates can be prevented and reversed by providing better access to birth control for teens, eliminating the negative connotation that accompanies abstinence, and implementing more efficient sex education in public schools.

The foundation of the abstinence-only policy was laid in 1981 under President Regan when the United States Congress passed the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA) administered by the Office of Adolescent Pregnancy Programs (OAPP) (Denny, 2006). The main purpose of this this proposal was to keep sexual relationships until marriage (Weaver, 2005). The AFLA became founded on the belief of funding and developing abstinence-only based curricula in public schools throughout the United States (Weaver, 2005).

Today, it is most common that conservative and religious families practice and teach abstinence more than families who are not religious (WebMD). School systems have always believed that the biggest contraceptive is abstinence, which is why they have been so consistent with that approach for so many years. “"Schools teach 'no smoking' and 'no drinking.' They don't say 'if you smoke, use a filter' or 'if you drink and drive, wear your safety belt.' Why should sex be treated differently?", said Peter Brandt, President of the National Coalition for Abstinence Education in Colorado Springs. It is imperative that school systems continue teaching abstinence but also inform students on the potential health risks of sex and how to prevent

Proponents for abstinence-only education believe that the abstinence-only message has contributed to the decline of adolescent sexual activity as well as negative related outcomes. In the 1990s there was a decrease in adolescent pregnancy, birth and abortion rates. These proponents attribute these declining statistics to the abstinence-only message and claim that the declines cannot be accredited to increased

$50 million was given for 5 years to states that agreed to teach abstinence in their schools (Sather & Zinn, 2002). In this push to prevent teen pregnancy, the government put states in a lose-lose situation. They could either receive money desperately needed for their schools and teach sex education that had been proven not to work (Sather & Zinn, 2002), or they could choose to teach another form of sex education, possibly one that had been proven to influence students, and miss out on the extra funding.

Actually, many states are paying more than ever for their students to receive an abstinence-based education. This leads to the next problem with abstinence-only education in America; cost. In 2015, $25 million in additional funding was granted for Title V, an 18-year-old federal program that doles out matching grants to states that agree to implement abstinence-only programs(thinkprogress). This program is not only harming the students, but also the tax payers! Tax payers who actually would prefer their students to be taught broad range of sexual education that would prepare them better for the real world. According to the results of a 2005-2006 nationally representative survey of U.S. adults published in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, more than eight in 10 of those polled support comprehensive sex education (siecus). So the question is, why do we continue to support a cause that is not providing our students any benefit and taking away so much

It has been almost thirty three years since the first federal funding was put to use in “. . . sex education programs that promote abstinence-only-until-marriage to the exclusion of all other approaches . . .” according to the article “Sex education” (2010) published by “Opposing Viewpoints in Context;” a website that specializes in covering social issues. Since then a muddy controversy has arisen over whether that is the best approach. On one hand is the traditional approach of abstinence (not having sex before marriage), and on the other is the idea that what is being done is not enough, and that there needs to be a more comprehensive approach. This entails not only warning against sex, but also teaching teens about how to have

Programs that encourage abstinence have become a vital part of school systems in the US. These programs are usually referred to as abstinence-only or value-based programs while other programs are called as safer-sex, comprehensive, secular or abstinence-plus programs which on the contrary promote the usage of effective contraception. Although abstinence-only and safer-sex programs disagree with one another, their core values and stand on the aims of sex education is to help teens develop problem-solving skills and the skill of good decision-making. They believe that adolescents will be better prepared to “act responsibly in the heat of the moment” (Silva). Most programs that have been currently implemented in the US have seen a delay in the initiation of sex among teens which proves to be a positive and desirable outcome (Silva).

Sex education should be increased in schools. Nearly one million women under the age of 20 get pregnant each year. That means 2800 women get pregnant each day. If students are educated about the effects sex has on their lives, it lessens their chance of having children at an early age. Knowledge about sex can also lessen the chance of kids receiving STDS.