Comprehensive Sex Education Research

The US teen pregnancy rate is at 72.2%, which is larger than any rate in Western European countries. Sex education can solve the problem that we see, and possibly lower that rate. It can benefit kids by informing them about everything involving sex instead of sheltering them from the truth. Abstinence-only education is the other option that is typically used, but creating a program to cover everything and not exclude some children who have different beliefs is the overall goal. This program should be offered for all students as a mandatory course because of the amount of information that is to be gained by teaching about sex, relationships, protection, STD’s, and sexual orientation.

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

Even though sex education has been proven to lower pregnancy and abortion rates among teens, for years people have argued that comprehensive or safe-sex education encourages early sexual activity instead of steering the thought away. However, the main issue is not education about sex but specifically what kind of education. In 1986 Planned Parenthood commissioned a poll to determine how comprehensive sex education which teaches about abstinence as the best method for avoiding STDs and unintended pregnancy, when affected behavior. Much to the agency’s disappointment, the study showed that kids exposed to such a program had a 47% higher rate of sexual activity than those who’d had no sex education at all. In contrast, a 1996 study on “Project

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

Since about the fifth grade we were always told to not have sex, that abstinence is the best thing for us. My sister told me once before, to not have sex “because I will get pregnant and die”, why would I listen to a 10 year old? Researchers from Georgetown University says that sexual education starts as early as age 10, her age doesn’t make her right, though. There is two types of sex education programs the abstinence-only program and the comprehensive. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have conducted studies of the sex ed program and what kinds of effects it has on students who are enrolled in it.

The U.S. has the highest rates of sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancies of any industrialized nation that put young teenagers at risks. It is estimate that 20,000 new cases of sexually transmitted diseases reported each year comes from people under the age of 25 and 82 percent of all teen pregnancies are accidents that account for one-fifth of all unintended pregnancies annually (CDC 2006). As a result, the government needs to stop funding and promoting abstinence only programs and start focusing on comprehensive sex education. Comprehensive sexuality education according to Sexuality Information and Education Council of the US (SIECUS) provides a complete message by teaching age appropriate and medically accurate information

The controversial topic of whether or not sex education curriculum should teach contraceptive use or abstinence-only is heavily debated. In 2013, the U.S. totaled 273,105 babies born by teenagers, ages from 15 to 19 (“About Teen Pregnancy”). This raises the question: why is the number of pregnancies so high? Is the reason for that unsettling high, number because abstinence-only is being taught or contraceptive use is being taught? Students who are taught abstinence-only are more likely to wait to have sex, which results in the lowering of teen pregnancy. The abstinence-only curriculum also reduces students sexual activity.The sex education curriculum in the U.S. should consist of abstinence-only education.

The fact that the United States does not actually require mandatory sex education is of utmost concern, seeing that places where sex education is not taught at all also experience the highest birthrates. In addition to places where sex education is not taught at all, areas in which abstinence-only education were taught also faced higher birthrates (Stanger-Hall and Hall 6). While abstinence only programs have shown no real statistical evidence of success, comprehensive sex education programs have, by combining the positives of both abstinence and information on how to engage in safe sex (Starkman and Rajani 314). In comprehensive sex education, students are taught not only how to use contraceptives properly, but also how to obtain them, as well as other aspects of practicing safe sex. Encouragingly, comprehensive sex education has shown a forty percent success rate in all of the following, “delaying the initiation of sex, reducing the number of sexual partners, and increasing contraceptive use.” Even more impressively, there was sixty-seven percent rate in these areas individually (Malone and Rodriguez 1). Teaching that abstinence is the only option, and providing no alternatives, leaves many teens vulnerable to engaging in unsafe sex out of pure incompetence (Starkman and Rajani 314). Despite many concerns, comprehensive sex education does not make a teenager more likely to be sexually active, and is surprisingly supported by the majority

The issue of comprehensive sex education has sparked debates among parents, teachers and even lawmakers. Children have the right to knowledge and this right to knowledge should not be limited to what is taught in abstinence only sex education, and this is why comprehensive sex education should be taught in schools. Some parents believe that if they do not teach their children about sex, their children will not have sex, but this is not true. Comprehensive sex education better equips young adults to protect themselves, but it also respects their right to be given accurate information that will be used for their entire lives.

However, controversy arises when the discussion as to what the proper method of teaching sexual education should be. In the school system of the United States sex education is taught in two main forms: abstinence-only sex education, which focuses on abstaining from sexual activity prior to marriage and does not provide contraceptive knowledge, and comprehensive sex education, which focuses on sexual health as a whole including knowledge about contraceptives and how to avoid STDs. Currently the only federally funded programs implemented in public schools are abstinence-only. But does Abstinence-only sex education work? In order to provide an answer this paper will discuss the basic principles and practices which constitute abstinence-only sex education, the proponents argument for abstinence-only sex education and how abstinence-only education affects teen pregnancy and STD

America’s youth has always been, and will always be sexually active. Students need to be taught about sexual risks such as STI’s and unplanned pregnancies as well as how to counter those risks by correctly using condoms and birth control. Teenagers aged 15-19 who received comprehensive sex education had pregnancy rates 50% lower than teenagers who received abstinence only education (Kohler, et al. 348). By dispelling rumors and providing up to date information, society is arming its youth with the ability to make the safer and healthier choices. Also, teaching safe sex at school does not mean different moral values cannot be instilled at home or in places of worship. Parents and religious leaders can still encourage teenagers to practice abstinence only. Sexual education should be a dual effort between parents and teachers. If society does not ensure its youth has a comprehensive sexual education, then it is setting them up for

Sexual education teaches adolescents about the use of birth control, their bodies, STD’s, and pregnancy. Due to the awareness of sexual education, adolescents are more careful about sexual intercourse. The pregnancy rate has reached the lowest in modern era between 1990-2010. It declined to 51% pregnancies per 1000 females ages 14-19 to 57.4%. This is the lowest recorded since 1973. Sexual education was not offered in schools until 1983 and many people had close to no knowledge about the options. Even though teens today are aware of their options today, they do not take proper precautions.

In both cases, Abstinence-only education did not direct them, in any way, to abstain from sex (Valenti). Therefore, given that so many teens will not desist from sex, effective sex education programs have the responsibility to help teens to be aware of the risks and consequences that come along with sexuality, like early pregnancy or STDs (Alford). Such effective programs should employ personalized interviews and follow-ups for each student and parents; as well as committees including doctors, psychologists, pediatricians, and real young people with shocking experience as a teen

All three of these sex educators also spoke to different elements that make the current high school sex education system damaging to its students. Ms. Corrado related: " I think one of the big things is fear mongering around STIs. Which leads to higher incident rates instead of actually reducing incident rates, because fear will not actually stop them from "doing it", but it just leads to people not knowing safer sex techniques and not knowing they are transmitting [STIs].” This supports the CDC report mentioned earlier, about the increasing number of students engaging in sexual activity and becoming infected with STIs, despite being in abstinence-based programs. For Ms. Basler-Francis the main issue was something else entirely: she believes

Teenage pregnancy is a growing problem in the United States today. As of 2010, 57.84% of 15-19 year old girls will become pregnant, which is especially high as compared to the rates of other developed countries. (Kost, 3) Why are unplanned pregnancy rates in teenagers so high? There are various factors that contribute to these high teen pregnancy rates, but one major factor is the type of sexual education that teenagers receives. While attention to abstinence in sexual education can be beneficial, it is when sexual education focuses solely on abstinence that teen pregnancy rates increase. Comprehensive sex education in schools has been shown to lower the rates of teen pregnancy more than abstinence only sex education has, and therefore should