Sex Education in High School

Sexual education is a highly debatable topic, but many believe the information taught to students should be abstinence-only. Abstinence-only education has been put in place in order to educate students about the social, mental, and physical benefits of resisting from all sexual activity. It emphasizes the unsafe impacts of participating in sexual activity before marriage and having casual sex. It also promotes the idea that sexual abstinence is the only way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease. Abstinence education only permits the discussion of contraception and condoms in terms of failure in order to utterly discourage casual sex (Wilgoren, 1). Along with teaching the physical dangers of sex, abstinence education also teaches the mental dangers of sex (Abstinence-Only Education, 1). Sex has many risks and dangers that are not

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

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

Abstinence only education is hindering the lives of teens in today’s world. Schools should stop teaching abstinence only education since, it increases the rate of teens having sexual relations with other people, it does not give students adequate lessons on preventing STDs, and the rate of teen pregnancy is higher for students who receive abstinence only education. As a nation we need to help teens protect themselves with this topic and most importantly approach it with caution. Many schools believe that abstinence only education is the most effective way to instruct students on the topic of sex when it clearly is not.

There are many problems facing teenagers these days. None are bigger than the issue of underage sex, and all the issues stemming from it. The number of teenagers becoming sexually active, pregnant, and contracting sexually transmitted diseases are rapidly on the rise. There is no simple fix, or easy solution to this problem. Sex education should begin at home, and extend to include an effective program in schools that reinforce a clear message of abstaining from sexual activity in addition to informing students of the risks posed by engaging in sexual activity. The political, and religious dissension on this issue has resulted in a procedural stalemate preventing schools from effectively addressing the problem, and implement a

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.

Some parents argue that only abstinence education should be taught in schools, to protect their children from sexually transmitted infections, unwanted pregnancies, and potentially negative effects of being sexually active at a young age. Education that only promotes abstinence is not only potentially harmful to young people, but it commonly distorts accurate information to scare the children into abstaining from sexual activity. According to a 2004 report by the Government Reform

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

A subject that is talked about a lot in today’s society is whether or not kids should receive sex education in public schools. With rates of teen pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases on the rise, it is essential that school aged adolescents receive appropriate sex education courses. Though many parents across the nation believe that it is crucial to curriculum, how much they should be taught and what exactly should be taught is up for dispute. Articles such as “Abstinence and Abstinence-only Education: A Review of U.S. policies and Programs” written by John Santelli, Mary A. Ott, Maureen Lyon, Jennifer Rogers, Daniel Summers and Rebecca Schleifer and “The Impact of Abstinence and Comprehensive Sex and STD/HIV Education Programs on Adolescent Sexual Behavior” Douglas B. Kirby analyze the two types of sex education in the U.S. and their effectiveness on teens. In “Abstinence and Abstinence-only Education: A Review of U.S. policies and Programs” Santelli et al. claims that even though sex education programs that only offer abstinence-only instruction are ethically flawed, abstinence from sexual activity is efficient behavioral choice for teenagers to make. In order to support their claim, the authors focus on the federal government’s involvement on funding for these abstinence programs and the censorship of the information that they portray. In “The Impact of Abstinence and Comprehensive Sex and STD/HIV Education Programs on Adolescent Sexual Behavior,”

In a busy and complicated landscape of sexuality and gender, it is generally recognized that children need instruction in how to behave. Unfortunately, the way that adults wish young people to be introduced to sexuality is governed by diverse worldviews and values, and the subject is seen as so important that this disparity leaves little room for neutrality, much less reasoned compromise. In many cases, the education of children in sexuality is regarded on all sides as a life-and-death issue, involving fundamental assumptions about the role of public and private institutions and even the very stability of society, to say nothing of the potential risks to individuals. As When Sex Goes to School puts it, there is very little within the domain of American politics and the infamous “culture wars” that is not touched by or based in the realm of sexuality and gender, and sex education is an arena where each side seeks to have its values publicly established for the benefit of students.

Comprehensive sex education is effective at assisting young people to make healthy decisions about sex and adopt healthy sexual behaviors. Strong evidence suggests that comprehensive approaches to sex education help young people both to withstand the pressures to have sex too soon and to have healthy, responsible and mutually protective relationships when they do become sexually active. A November 2007 report found that “two-thirds of the 48 comprehensive programs that supported both abstinence and the use of condoms and contraceptives for sexually active teens had positive behavioral effects (Rochman 2012).” Many delayed or reduced sexual activity, reduced the number of sexual partners, and increased the use of condoms or other contraceptives. Research has identified highly effective sex education and HIV prevention programs affect multiple behaviors and achieve positive health impacts. Behavioral outcomes have included delaying the initiation of sex as well as reducing the frequency of sex, the number of new partners, the incidence of unprotected sex, and increasing the use of condoms and contraception among sexually active participants. Long-term impacts have included lower STI and pregnancy rates (McKeon

Should sex education be allowed in high schools? This has been a controversial issue nationwide for over a decade. The American culture is immensely sexually oriented. Sex can be seen through the media and with the younger generation being heavily influenced by technology; they cannot avoid it. In light of this, many of the youth today lack information on sex which highlights the problem. Some people believe that sex education only diminishes one’s rectitude because they feel that sex education encourages the students to partake in sexual intercourse. Although sex education degrades the virtues of children by informing students how to use birth control and condoms, it is imperative in high schools because it prevents sexually transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancy, accommodates in case of parents’ absence, and gives children the idea of morality.

Controversy is rampant regarding the sexual education of grade school children. Some insist that it is prudent to educate children on this subject beginning as early as kindergarten. Others strongly disagree that earlier education has any effect at all on teen sex and pregnancy and, therefore, abstinence should be the focus. Lastly, we have those who believe advocating abstinence is appropriate, but agree that a more in depth sexual education is also necessary for those who are going to have sex anyway despite our best efforts to teach them otherwise.

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,