Abstinence-Only Sex Education Programs

Additional research has explored the effects of abstinence based programs on actual behavior outcomes. Kohler, Manhart, and Lafferty (2008) compared the effects of abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education programs, operationalizing effectiveness in terms of initiation of sexual activity and teen pregnancy rates. They found that teenagers who received comprehensive sex education rather than abstinence-only or no education were significantly less likely to report a teenage pregnancy. In addition, their conclusions mirrored Sather and Kelly (2002), finding that abstinence-based programs did not reduce the likelihood of engaging in sexual activity. Kohler, Manhart, and Lafferty (2008) actually concluded that comprehensive sex education was more likely than abstinence based to reduce the percentage engaging in sexual activity. Overall, the researchers showed that comprehensive sex education, including but not limited to contraception, did not increase the prevalence of sexual activity in teenagers or the risk of teen pregnancy, while also showing the that abstinence only education produced a higher likelihood of pregnancy.

According to advocatesforyouth.org, “abstinence only education teaches students to abstain from sex prior to marriage.” These program has been proven to be ineffective. Abstinence only education is ineffective because it is not conducive in reducing teen pregnancy rates and sexually transmitted diseases rates. Abstinence only programs are less likely to teach students about birth control and contraception and how to access it. These programs has not been shown to reduce teen sexual activity.

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 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

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

Clemmitt (2010) states that currently the most effective approach to prevent teenage pregnancy is evidence-based sex education programs. The primary debate about the best method of preventing teenage pregnancy is between abstinence-only courses and comprehensive sex education. The author says that after operating comprehensive sex education, the Obama approach, many communities and county areas have drastically reduced the rate of teenage pregnancy. Studies and statistics suggested that abstinence-only courses have not contributed to reduce teenage pregnancy rates. The author points out that the abstinence-only courses also include sexually transmitted diseases classes and discussions of unhealthy relationship and making decisions, and abstinence

Does “abstinence-only” programs mean abstinence-only lives for teenagers receiving this type of sexual education? There are those who fully support abstinence-only sex education while others deny its ability and believe it only under educates teenagers. From the latter, the author claims that abstinence only programs are not effective. He presents evidence to suggest this is valid, including that high school students need medically accurate information on how to decrease their risk of sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy because they are sexually active. Though the underlying issue has merit and the argument is sound and is valid because of logical

Many believe that making the contraceptive available to teenage sends the wrong message and promotes promiscuity among teenagers. Teens should be better informed of options and will possibly make better decisions with adequate education regarding contraceptives and what they prevent. Advocates for youth states “Evaluations of comprehensive sex education and HIV/ STI prevention programs show that they do not increase rates of sexual initiation, do not lower the age at which youth initiate sex, and do not increase the frequency of sex or the number of sex partners among sexually active

Many studies have shown that programs that focus on abstinence rather than contraceptive use are successful in reducing teen sexual activity”(Kim). She goes on to explain that abstinence is the best possible choice. Also that early sexual activity during teen years can have a risk of causing a contraction of a sexually transmitted disease, damage psychological constitution, lower academic achievement and cause unwanted teen pregnancy. All of these side effects are completely avoidable. The definition of “abstinence” is “Abstinence from sexual activity outside of marriage as expected standard for all school age children (Kim). It is emphasized as a healthy lifestyle and is explained by its effect on social, psychological, and health aspects. She cites that “Studies have shown that abstinent teens report, on average better psychological well being and higher educational attainment than those who are sexually active. She makes sure to repeat the claim that early sexual encounters can cause early irreparable psychological damage. A 2010 study in medical journal archives of pediatrics concludes that a abstinence only education reduced sexual initiation in the group of African-American adolescents. Two years later one third of the participants had initiated in sexual activity. “By

Abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education follow vary different outlines in methods of teaching and the goals they hope to achieve. Controversy surrounding this topic focuses on what is being taught and how this relates to values favoring abstinence, with the belief that education on birth control encourages sexual activity (Abstinence Only Education, 2005). Planned Parenthood states the following: “Abstinence-only programs (also called abstinence-only until marriage programs) promote abstinence from sexual behavior” (Planned Parenthood: Implementing Sex Education, n.d.) Abstinence-only programs only teach abstinence, as per their name, and in fact, they purposely exclude information on “birth control, safer sex and sex orientation” (Planned

Five seventh grade students in a New Orleans middle school were asked how to prevent HIV/AIDS and pregnancy. They believe, eating a hot pepper after sex will prevent STD's and unwanted pregnancy. These students attended an abstinence-only education school where they are prohibited to discuss condoms and other contraceptives to prevent STD and pregnancy (Woebse, 709-710). Since 2014 the U.S teen pregnancy birth rate dropped to 24.2 per 1000 women, 9% lower than 2013(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). With abstinence-only education being taught, could abstinence-only education be credited for the decline? Does the thought of eating hot peppers after engaging in a sexual act scare teens enough to be abstinent? Or are teens learning

The theory of paradox is put into action when policymakers come up with policies centered on sex education. The theory of paradox is used to compromise on an issue at hand. There is one goal at hand, and two different, yet equally valid ways to reach said goal (Bogenschneider, 2014). There are two main approaches to lowering teen pregnancy and birth rates: abstinence-only sex education and comprehensive sex education. The federal government funds both different approaches but has more money available to states that choose to implement abstinence-only programs. Researchers look at teen pregnancy and birth rates in each state to calculate and observe the effectiveness of abstinence-only versus comprehensive sex education programs (University

Social control is considered, “The process through which a group influences the behavior of its members toward conformity with its norms” (Kirst-Ashman, 2014, p. 544). One concept that is used be the Catholic Church to control teens is abstinence programs. Even though there is little evidence supporting abstinence-only programs, Catholic schools are still including them in their curriculum.

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).

On the other hand, new approach known as Abstinence-plus sex education or Abstinence, Be Faithful, and use a Condom commonly known as ABC. The approach is aim to sex education based on combination of “risk avoidance” and harm reduction this modifies the abstinence-only sex-education. The policy also stresses the abstinence and includes information about safe sex practices. According to Edward C Green, Presidential Advisory Council on HIV and AIDS in 2003-2007 “Advocates of the ABCs often use the term to mean a primary emphasis on Abstinence/delay of sexual debut and faithfulness/partner reduction, with condom use being a secondary but necessary strategy for those who do not or cannot practice abstinence or fidelity” . In Uganda, president Museveni