Sex In Middle School Or High School

Sex education should be implemented at an early age beginning at the middle school level. A discussion of contraception, the risks of diseases, the risk of becoming an unwed teen parent and the disadvantages of not having an education will help decrease the number of teen pregnancies with future generations. Parents should not feel threatened of having their children learning about sex in class. Parents should feel empowered; it will allow their children opportunities to feel they are able to discuss future topics of sex at home to help promote

The teenagers and children of today read about, listen to and watch all sorts of information about sex. While most adults have had some form of sex education, we must ask if this new generation is learning anything new or helpful from their sex education classes. The American culture and way of living is so absorbed in sex that children should be taught about it, people just can not agree on how to teach them. In her article New Sex ed Funding Ends Decade of Abstinence-Only, Kelli Kennedy proves that abstinence-only sex education classes and programs are not as good as regular sex education classes better than Shari Roan does in her article Teen pregnancy rates rises. Are abstinent-only programs to blame?

The role of educating students about the importance of healthy sexual relationships has fallen hard and fast on public schools. School aged boys and girls are not receiving information from their parents on what decisions they should make in regards to sex. Parents are finding this topic of conversation too taboo to breach and as a result, students are getting what little information they are receiving from school. Less then half of school aged adolescents talk to their parents about sex and abstinence (Smith, 2005).

We have all heard the stories about the rise in teenage pregnancies, girls dropping out of school to care for their newborns, and even those who get pregnant on purpose. This new trend is everywhere. Most parents fail to have the “talk” with their children and are left without the proper education regarding sex until its too late. With the current rates of teenage pregnancy correlated with the current rates of spreading epidemics of STD’s and HIV/AIDS, steps should be taken in an effort to aid the situation. Schools are a main source of information and education for teens, and are in a unique position that can provide adolescents with knowledgeable skills and understanding that promote sexual health. With consistent speculation surrounding

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

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

Abstinence is a remarkable topic to be taught, however, should not be the only choice taught, and it’s impractical to expect the youth to hold out until marriage. Abstinence, along with STD and pregnancy prevention is imperative for the youth in the nation. It is factual that accepting promiscuity as part of our culture might cause a rise in STD's, teen pregnancy, and Aid’s. These increases are the reason we must begin early in educating children about the diseases, how to prevent them, and how to practice safe sex. Schools are insane for not lecturing the importance, or proper use of

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

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

Statistics show that teenagers are having sex, especially unsafe sex. Our lack of educating children is projected when the United States has some of the highest sexually transmitted infection rates and pregnancy rates for teenagers among industrialized nations (NCBI). When this day in age a teacher can be investigated for using the word “vagina” our children may be prone to inhibit their questions, it stunts communication, and it cultivates secrets with sexual abusers. It’s time as parents we become aware of changing times and teach our children how to appropriately cope with

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

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.

Children of these generations are having more access to all kinds of information including sex and sexuality than past generations. They can get sexual information from school, parents, friends, and even from Internet. Talking about sexuality is always been a hard topic that concerns mostly schools and parents. But who are the right teachers that should tell everything about sex and sexuality to the children? After asking me this question many times, I believe that parents should teach their own children because they are the role models to the children, give them the right information, and protect them. Schools still need to have sex education programs, but parents are the ones who are primarily responsible.