Essay on Should Sex Education be Taken Out of Schools?

According to a research survey by UniSA’s Emeritus Professor Bruce Johnson, 77% of girls and 74% of boys cited their high school sexual education lessons as their number one source of information on sexuality and relationships, with friends being cited as their second most likely source. Such a large number of Australian teenagers count and rely on their PDHPE classes to teach them such paramount lessons about such an important topic. This leads us to assume that, if such a considerable percentage of high school students rely on these lessons for their sexual education, they must be learning everything they desire to know from these lessons. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Within the same research survey, it was discovered that there were many subjects students wished were taught more in depth. 52% of girls wanted more

Sexual education in schools has become a highly controversial topic over the past few years. Some people believe students should be taught abstinence-only education, while others believe students need the full on “sex talk”. While the sex education controversy may seem silly, it is very important that students receive the most efficient education possible. When it comes to education parents want their children to receive the most effective kind. This is also very true in terms of sex education. Sex education is very debatable right now as to whether students should be taught abstinence-only education or comprehensive sex education.

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.

The philosophy behind abstinence-only policy implies that the greatest risk of informing students about their options for contraception would be that educators are condoning premarital sex. The risks that our students are already taking, however, are greater then policymakers are considering. It is generally accepted that the majority of sexual intercourse among young people remains unprotected (Westwood, 2006). Abstinence-only curriculum is not preventing adolescents from having sex; it is just making them naïve to the risks they are taking with their lifestyle choices.

This assignment will look at the services that promote sex and relationship education. It will identify the current health issues on promoting and teaching children about sex and relationship education in schools at a young age. Sex and relationships education has been a highlighted topic for over time which is being highly debated about whether it should taught to young children. There are mixed views on how sex and relationship education is taught, statistics show ‘Most parents (65%) believe that sex education should encourage young people to delay sexual activity’ (Kaiser Family Foundation in 2000). Whereas some parents disagree as they think their children are too young to know about sex and relationships, this essay will look at the

The classes proved information about contraceptives, STDs and HIV prevention. It also is age appropriate and scientifically explained. Collins says it well that “by denying teens the full range of information regarding human sexuality, abstinence-only education fails to provide young people with the information they need to protect their health and well being.” Students when asked survey by the Kasier Family Foundation said that they knew more and felt better prepared to handle different situations. Abstinence only education just chooses to avoid it and does not take into account students who decide a different path. Abstinence only education supports say that by teaching the “abstinence-plus” education that they are sending mixed messages towards students. Current advocates for comprehensive education cite that “providing teens with contraceptive information does not encourage early sexual activity.” The Surgeon General David Satcher had said that based off of the information he had derived from both approaches “evidence gives strong support to the conclusion that providing information about contraception does not increase adolescent sexual activity….[it only] increased condom and contraceptive uses among adolescents who were sexually active.” (Collins 9)Most evaluations of many different types of

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.

“The ideal of what historian Anne Higonnet calls the Romantic Child, our modern image of a naturally asexual, pure child, is at the heart of century-long conflicts over sex education. By definition, the romantic child’s innocence depends on protection from sexuality” (Talk About Sex 13). Parents, in general, do not feel at ease thinking about their children having sex, nor do they want to encourage them to do so. The fact that most parents are not comfortable talking about the subject with their children only increases the importance of doing so in our schools.

Sex education, most commonly known as family life, is any information about sex and sexual relationships taught to maturing young people as a part of a school’s curriculum. Currently, there is a constant political and ideological debate in the United States over the merits of abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education programs in the teaching of our youth. Abstinence only sex education has been the primary sex education taught in the United States. Although different in their approach, the overall goal is to help them build a foundation to be able to make healthy informed decisions as they mature into adults. The objectives of sex education programs are to help adolescents develop a positive view of sexuality, body image and make responsible decisions in relationships (Knowles, 2012). Ultimately, any sex education should be a partnership between parents, guardians and school personnel. However, in recent years, a large amount of information about sexuality is acquired through friends, music, books and the media instead of from their parents. For some individuals,

Grounded in the UK’s political climate, Cosslett examines the failures of the Sex Education programs already in place in British public schools. The article begins with a strong statement on the need for Sex Education and continues by outlining various pitfalls that require correction within the current system in place. Within her article, Cosslett uses comedic personal experiences, and the personal experiences of people around her, to highlight the problems within the current Sex Education cirriculum before she addresses serious concerns with the program. Lack of consent education, an uptick in teenage domestic abuse, and an increased reliance on inaccurate pornography as a main source of education are three major reasons, Cosslett insists Sexual Education must be reformed. Using her comedic experiences to ease readers into the harder subject material, Cosslett addresses further on within the article, but the more pressing material she presents remains the main focus of her article as well as her main attempt to reach her audience: parents. With the closing of the article, Cosslett finishes with the idea that Sexual Education in school remains an immediate, important action

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

Each of the fifty states has the power to implement its own sexual education system, but this may not always be for the best. In a modern era where youth is engulfed by the Internet and instant communication and an increasingly liberal media, many adults consider sexual education an uncomfortable topic to discuss. However, does establishing a comprehensive sexual education curriculum encourage children and teenagers to engage in dangerous sexual acts that lead to life-changing consequences? I hypothesize that a comprehensive sexual education proves itself beneficial in all cases because it keeps children and teenagers informed about the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases and potential pregnancies as well as the emotional

Sexual education in public schools is one of the most controversial issues in education. In today’s society, it is almost impossible to ignore the responsibility of informing adolescence about the issues of sex. Since the lack of knowledge, leads to an array of issues ranging from teen pregnancy to sexually transmitted diseases. The debate over whether to implement sex education in American schools has ended. The question is whether comprehensive sex education classes are more impressionable than those stressing abstinence only.

Since the first sex education video, "Human Growth" was shown in public schools in the 1940's, sex education in school has remained a controversial subject (Bellafante 9.1). In the present however, it is no longer disputed whether or not sex-ed should be taught, but what should be taught in a sex education program. Conservatives and Liberals both agree that sex education in public schools is important but, their views on what should be taught differ dramatically. Despite the various monikers to describe different sex education programs and curricula, there are really only two types: abstinence-until-marriage and comprehensive (Sex Education Programs: Definitions & Point-by-Point

Programs that encourage abstinence have become a vital part of school systems in the US. These programs are usually referred to as abstinence-only or value-based programs while other programs are called as safer-sex, comprehensive, secular or abstinence-plus programs which on the contrary promote the usage of effective contraception. Although abstinence-only and safer-sex programs disagree with one another, their core values and stand on the aims of sex education is to help teens develop problem-solving skills and the skill of good decision-making. They believe that adolescents will be better prepared to “act responsibly in the heat of the moment” (Silva). Most programs that have been currently implemented in the US have seen a delay in the initiation of sex among teens which proves to be a positive and desirable outcome (Silva).