“Don't have sex, because you will get pregnant and die! Don't have sex in the missionary position, don't have sex standing up, just don't do it, OK, promise? ” (Mean Girls). When thinking about sex-ed this quote is normally what one thinks of. For some teenagers in the American public school system, this lesson from Coach Karr was the gist of their sexual education in high school. Remain abstinent, but if you don’t listen to us, here are some condoms. There will always be those who try to force their ideas down your throat, Mormons, kiosk workers, vegans, Sex Ed enthusiasts; so where do we draw the line on what information should be taught as common knowledge? Making Sexual Education a mandatory standard completely discredits the idea of what public education is about, and therefore, must remain an optional program. The indoctrination of sex to children undermines the rights of parents by forcing a highly personal conversation in the impersonal setting of a classroom. Enforcing mandatory sex education would be no different than the state preventing people from honoring their personal religious obligations. Before delving further into the moral conflict, allow me to familiarize you with the latest update to health education in the California Education Code. AB-329 signed in October 2015 works to integrate the instruction of comprehensive sexual health education and HIV prevention education. The bill requires school districts to ensure that all pupils in grades 7 to 12,
Modern era sex education programs in the United States began in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a result of the AIDS/HIV epidemic. With the introduction of curricula teaching safe sex and the effectiveness of contraception, other curricula refuted these ideas thus creating a conflict about sex education in the U.S. Sex education in the U.S is divided into two categories: abstinence-only and comprehensive, the former being the most implemented among states nationwide. Abstinence-only programs stress the importance of abstaining from sex until marriage, fitting the “traditional” set of American morals. Covering more than just abstinence, comprehensive sex education programs not only teach students about the options they have when it comes
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.
During 1920s, U.S. schools began to incorporate sex education to their courses. A 2002 study conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that “58% of secondary school principals describe their sex education curriculum as comprehensive programs provide factual information about birth control, sexual transmitted disease, and continue the message to children about waiting to have sex.” (Johannah)
Did you know that 24 states in the US require their public schools to teach sex education and HIV education to their students (NCL.org)? Do they even need to understand sex or STDs? Well of course not. That’s why schools should not even teach these students sex because it’s just going to be too much for the high school students’ young mind, sex education will definitely motivate the students to have sex—regardless of their sexuality--, and it’s up to their not so busy parents to explain sex—and all its glory—to their children who are attending high school.
I think it is safe to say that no two words elicit more feelings of concern, anxiety, and anger in parents, and stirs up more controversy and debate than the words “sexual education”. This especially true with the implementation of the new, revised sexual education curriculum in Ontario schools. Consequently, this controversy has strongly divided individuals, families, and organizations between those who approved of and those who opposed and protested against school-based programs that providee sexual health education to children. But why so much opposition? This is due to the significant changes made to the sexual education curriculum and the sensitive nature of the topics being taught to children regarding sexuality as a whole, changes which are seen as both radical and “even more explicit and more age-inappropriate than before…” (“Ontario’s Radical,” n.d.).
Human nature has shaped and developed many different social norms in our society, however, they also create many social problems when conflicting views come under scrutinization. Sexual education in America has been problematic since the late 1900’s because there is simply a lack of it. Sexual education has transformed over a hundred years, abated by the effect of religious upbringings and conservative outlooks. However, as evolved as it is today, it is still a national issue because of the ongoing struggle of comprehensive sexual education against abstinence, and in the midst of the two, students are still not being exposed to proper sexual health.
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
Sex education, arguably one of the most controversial topics to surface in American politics over the past half century, poses a complicated problem to citizens and lawmakers alike. Following the AIDS epidemic and spike in teen pregnancy in the 1980s, lawmakers and educators began drafting and implementing more sex education classes and courses in public schools in an attempt to remedy the ever-growing issue. While few object to the idea in itself, the method and content of its teaching is highly controversial. Should we teach abstinence or safe sex? How early should children be exposed to this material? How effective are these classes? These are just a few questions surrounding the issue, which are often disputed.
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
Comprehensive sexuality education has always been a focal point of the debate across the United States. Any topics related to sexuality education would make tremendous amount of people feel embarrassed and uncomfortable because sex education is fallaciously perceived as a stigma of the society on an increase rate of unintended pregnancy, the outbreak of sexual transmitted diseases, and other social ethical issues. From a U.S. review, however, “the overwhelming weight of evidence shows that sex education that discusses contraception does not increase sexual activity.” The understanding of sex education not only covers simply a part in reproduction, or how babies are conceived and born but also helps the teenager to have some basis understanding of virtually every aspect of sex by the time he or she reaches full maturity, and more importantly, it encourages confidence and improves communication skills, the social issues surrounding sexuality and reproduction as well as cultural norms, family
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Ignorance is anything but bliss. Sex in society is becoming more and more prevalent and exposed whether it be through the avenues of television, radio, books, etc. With pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and HIV rates among teens significantly rising, legislation has yet to take any action to implement mandatory sex programs to educate our youth. It seems as though these numbers will continue to increase unless preventive measures, beyond the “wait until marriage” programs, are put into place.
An alarming rate of Sexually Transmitted Infections and Pregnancy among teenagers has been an ongoing concern and could be linked to the lack of sex education in schools. Statistics show that 3 in 10 teenagers are becoming pregnant every year, and 1 in four teenagers are contracting sexually transmitted infections. There are numerous opposing views towards the teaching of comprehensive sex education in school districts. Many people are opposed to this because they believe that it encourages premarital sexual promiscuity in young adults, is destructive to religious belief, and is inappropriate and harmful. “Comprehensive Sex Education Is Inappropriate and Harmful” is and article that provides concrete evidence, for example, it states in the article that “Teens enrolled in these classes are given false information about how pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases can be avoided and may actually be encouraged to engage in activities that could lead to sexual intercourse” which is quite the contrary. My personal view is that as a nation we should be teaching students comprehensive sex education also known as abstinence plus, because it will better educate students and save money. Comprehensive sex education stresses the importance of abstinence, but also provides important information for the prevention of STI’s and unplanned pregnancies. I believe this needs to be taught in schools because I come from a school that taught abstinence only and nothing more, and the number of
As children grow, they accumulate knowledge over the years about a variety of subjects to prepare them for the future. Children learn from parents, schools, life experiences, what they watch and other influences around them, and it can be either positive learning or negative learning. There is one subject that is difficult to teach and have control over because of misunderstandings, lack of teaching, and publicity. Sex education has been a major debate for children under eighteen, because there are some parents that want it taught in schools and others that do not because of different reasons. There are currently eighteen states and the District of Columbia that require schools to provide sex education and thirty-two that do not require
There are many states that do not provide the kind of sex education that New Jersey strives to convey to its students. It more often than not ties in with the religious right proclaiming that students are too young to be exposed to sexual material, and thus sexualized as a result. These fundamental groups oppose any suggestion towards a comprehensive approach. Instead, they ask that their children be taught after grade school and additionally, they steer towards ‘abstinence-only’ education. Instead of teaching students how to protect themselves, they teach that the only way to protect oneself is by abstaining from sex. The problem arises, then, when these students decide to have sex. They are unaware of how to conduct themselves responsibly, how to take precautions to prevent against unwanted pregnancy and disease. What kind of ‘education’ are students receiving when they are withheld crucial information?
Coinciding with the onslaught of the new millennium, schools are beginning to realize that the parents are not doing their job when it comes to sexual education. The school system already has classes on sexual education; these classes are based mainly on human anatomy. Most schools do not teach their students about relationships, morals, respect, self-discipline, self-respect, and most importantly contraceptives. Everyday students engage in sexual activity, many of them with out condoms. This simple act jeopardizes these students' futures and possibly their lives. An increasing amount of school systems are starting to combine messages involving abstinence from sexual activity,