Abstinence-Only Sexual Education

Comprehensive education teaches students about contraception, including emergency contraception, reproductive choices, LGBT issues, anatomy, and other traditional topics, including abstinence, as part of the curriculum, because of this comprehensive education is referred to by some as abstinence plus. (“Comprehensive Sex Education vs. Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage-Programs”) Comprehensive education focuses on giving student options on how to manage if they do choose to have sex. As the average age at which Americans start having sex drops, teaching students about how to prevent or deal with sexually transmitted diseases and avoid unplanned pregnancy becomes increasingly important. (“Sex Education Promotes Understanding and Safety”) 34% of sexually active students said they didn’t use a condom the last time they had sex, which is what increases the odds of getting an STD or becoming

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.

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

Studies show that teenagers who’ve had sex later regret it. Abstinence only education should be the only education taught in schools instead of comprehensive education. The most popular ways of teaching about sex are abstinence teachings and comprehensive education. Abstinence education is a better option than comprehensive because it is the only effective way to avoid pregnancy, protects against sexually transmitted diseases, and proves the partner is interested for more than sex; comprehensive education teaches that there is a way for safe sex if students choose that path but teenage sex should not be an option. “…encouraging teens to just say no to sex may be the most effective at delaying early sexual activity”

the education can delay and reduce teen sexual activity, but there is no evidence for this

Sex education has always been a controversial topic, especially to the extent that it is taught to. Under the early years of the Reagan administration, the Adolescent Family Life Act was passed for abstinence-only education based on the presumption that talking about sex in school would promote sexual activities among teenagers. The two-point act was quietly passed in 1981, as it was not voted on by the House and was coded under Title XX of the Public Service Health Act. The first point was to provide at least two-thirds of funds to support pregnant teenagers, while the second point’s purpose was to use the remaining one-third or less to discourage sexual acts until marriage. Lawrence (2007) asserted that teenage pregnancy rates at the time of passing were rising, so the government wanted to stop everything all together. Since then, billions of dollars have been spent and more laws have been passed to promote abstinence-only education. Pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in the U.S. actually continued to rise, despite what was believed that the acts and funding could accomplish (p. 2). Though scientists and accredited researchers saw this coming, they continued with research to finalize conclusions with the majority hypothesis that comprehensive sex education would show the greatest improvement among teenage pregnancy. Comprehensive sex education

Abstinence-only sex education teaches that the only morally right choice is to stay a virgin until you are married. Abstinence-plus education strongly encourages abstinence, but also teaches of the use of condoms/contraceptives(Advocates for youth). Both options include certain points that must be hit during the course including; must teach abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children, teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out of wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems, teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity; teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects; teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society; teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances; and teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity (dshs). Out of all 50 states, 37 states require sex education that includes abstinence, 26 of which require that abstinence be stressed as the

The United States has some of the highest teen pregnancy rates among developed countries (Stanger-Hall, 2011). In states where abstinence-only sexuality education is very strict, there is no data to support decreasing incidences of teen pregnancies. In fact, teen pregnancies rates are almost twenty percent higher in states where abstinence-only education is heavily stressed compared to states with no mention of abstinence at all. Because teen pregnancy rates and stricter abstinence-only curriculums are directly proportional, this would indicate abstinence-only education is not having the desired effect on students that educators are hoping to have. Comprehensive sexuality education could possibly result in a decline in teen pregnancy rates by providing factual information about pregnancy and

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.

The hypothesis is that abstinence-only sex education does not cause teenagers to have less sex when compared to comprehensive sex education. In a comprehensive sex course, the students would learn that abstinence is the best method for avoiding STIs and pregnancy, but it would also teach about positive contraceptive use, sexual health, and sexual expression. By teaching the

The Abstinence only programs do not use anything outside of some skewed statistics and half-truths at best to argue that comprehensive sex education is detrimental to the students that receive it in any form. They use fear as the primary driving force behind the movement along with language that make it hard to debate without looking bad. According to Advocates for Youth research that was published in Comprehensive Sex Education: Research and Results the more information a student has the less likely they are to participate in risky activities, have fewer sexual partners and lower teen pregnancy/STI rates (Advocates for Youth, 2007). While Advocates for Youth are supporters of completely comprehensive sex education in American schools there are other programs the discuss abstinence plus programs which identify abstinence as the preference but agree with the need for the student to be educated in STI prevention, correct condom use and birth control options for the student. In the article “Community Attitudes Toward School-Based Sexuality Education in a Conservative State” Dunn, Thompson, M’Cormack and Yannessa discuss this fact. They identify that even in a conservative state such as South Carolina many of the parents agree that there needs to be a supplement to abstinence only in order to make

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.

[Double thesis] People who oppose abstinence education think such programs lead to higher teen pregnancies along with a long list of STDs. On the other hand, people who favor them say this is the sole way to guarantee you will not get pregnant or catch any STD while might see this as a somewhat come of as ignorance.

Abstinence reduces teen sexual activity. Adolescent and Family Health found a 67% increase for abstinence of the decline in pregnancy rate for teen girls ages of 15-19. In the article it also states that the Journal of Adolescent Health attributes 53% of the decline in pregnancy rates for 15-17 year olds decrease sexual activity. Abstinence is the best solutions to decrease the rates of pregnancies and sexual transmitted diseases. Abstinence has an enormous decline rate in pregnancies