Texas Sexual Education Policy : A Proposed Policy Change

There is a strong need for greater access to current and evidence-based sex education in American public schools. Concurrent with access to information and education about human sexuality, schools should also be offering students safe, anonymous ways of receiving condoms. Condoms are crucial for preventing unwanted pregnancy: and it can easily be said that all teen pregnancies in the United States will be classified as unwanted. Moreover, condoms will prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. When they are used properly, condoms can become lifesavers. However, adolescents are often woefully ignorant about when and how to use condoms. Few adolescents in the United States have ready access to condoms, either at home or in schools. Because of the general prudishness embedded in Bible Belt America, states like Georgia must take a strong stance on the issue. Georgia should follow suit with states like Massachusetts, who have implemented successful condom distribution programs in their schools.

In Canadian society, there are certain things that are expected to happen. Any type of public hatred against the LGBTQ+ community, or any other cultural, or religious group, is completely not acceptable. As well as sexual education is to be taught in the school system. Beginning September of 2015, the Ontario school system implemented an upgrade to the province’s sexual health education curriculum. The updated curriculum contains a more progressive outlook than the old curriculum, which had not been updated since 1998 Today’s society is sexually explicit, and because of this, Ontario has tapered their sexual education towards this fact. This essay will explore the differences in how the curriculum has been received, and how the sexual education

Alabama’s sex education law strictly regulates the type of sex education programs that are taught in public schools. Currently, Alabama law does not mandate sex education, but if schools choose to offer sex education, they must teach, “homosexuality is not a lifestyle acceptable to the general public.” This harmful, discriminatory language should be repealed. All students deserve respect in schools, but the legal mandate currently in place prohibits discussion of LGBTQ relationships in a positive way and requires that teachers stigmatize and shame their students. Many of Alabama’s sex programs emphasize abstinence only for school-aged children. Young Alabamians don’t need shaming and stigma; they need access to comprehensive sex education to be equipped with the resources and tools to make healthy decisions about their lives. Countless studies have shown that sex education that focuses on abstinence rather than giving young people the proper tools to make healthy sexual choices are not effective. Through funds allocated to properly train faculty and staff on effective sex education – including for LGBTQ students – young Alabamians will be empowered to take responsibility for their

These programs focus on teaching teens and youth to just say no. These programs are so focused on keeping teens ignorant about sex and conforming to standards of heteronormativity, that according to Planned Parenthood, they purposely exclude information on “…birth control, safer sex and sex orientation” (“Planned Parenthood: Implementing Sex Education”, n.d.). As Planned Parenthood also states, although abstinence is the only method that fully prevents pregnancy and STDs (“Planned Parenthood: What is Abstinence?”, n.d.), the belief that abstinence education is sufficient in guiding decisions on sexual behavior is erroneous. According to the Texas Freedom Network, sex education in the state of Texas can be broken up into two subcategories of abstinence education; “Abstinence-only 74.6% (Abstinence Programs: 27.2%, Textbook only: 47.4%), Abstinence Plus: 25.4% (Worth the Wait 19.5%, Big Decision: 4.1%, Other Programs: 1.8%)” (TFN, 2011). The lack of informed discussion prevents young women from having the knowledge to make informed decisions about their sexual health, and thus limits their reproductive

Every person has the right of balanced sex education, if they want. Abstinence-only education is not the correct approach in Texas, because the programs ignore youth’s basic human right and the fundamental public health principle of accurate information, they advocate contraceptive use and does not emphasize their failure rates, and virginity pledges do not delay the beginning of sexual activity.

Proper education is key when it comes to preventing teen pregnancy, and that is why Be Safe, Not Sorry is dedicated to the education of young adults. Sexual education is taught in public schools at varying levels but does not have as serious of an impact as is intended. Brazos Independent School District (BISD) includes a curriculum on abstinence, but further explanation on safe sex practices is not included. Focusing on teenage girls between 15 and 19 years old, Be Safe, Not Sorry strives to expand on their current knowledge of safe sex practices in order to prevent teen pregnancies. As of 2014, Brazos City, Texas has a teen pregnancy rate of about 30 out of 1,000 teenage girls. To address this issue, Be Safe, Not Sorry will be a program

Sex education for American youth has been a topic of discussion across the nation since the early 1980s. Teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted disease are two major problems throughout the U.S.. Sexually transmitted infections have been an ongoing problem for American people since World War I. To combat the growing teen pregnancy and STI rates, the U.S. established organized sex education. Since sex education has been integrated in schools across the nation, it has been heavily influenced by religion. The federal government has funded abstinence-only education programs for over a quarter century. Abstinence-only

At this time in the United States, there is no federal law requiring sex education in public schools leaving the decision to mandate sex education at the state level (Planned Parenthood, n.d.). While the federal government does not require states to teach sex education, they do provide funding for sex education programs (Planned Parenthood, n.d.). The federal government has never provided any funding for comprehensive sex education while they have provided funding for abstinence only sex education since 1982 (SIECUS Annual Report, 2016; Donovan, 2017). However, within the last decade there has been an increase in funding for teen pregnancy prevention (Donovan, 2017). This could be largely due to the numerous studies that show a more desirable

In El Paso, just like many other cities in the conservative States, the chosen form of sex Ed. is abstinence only, thus making it so that most middle and high schools do not offer the option of even taking the comprehensive class. This causes issues of public and personal safety to arise, as well as reckless endangerment. Most people, especially teenagers, do not know their anatomy as well as they believe they do, nor of any diseases that may be transferred through menial tasks such as; sharing a toothbrush, sharing edibles, etc. Abstinence only teachings have been proven to be ineffective as they do not prevent teenage pregnancy, the start of the act, nor the number of partners a teen might take. Comprehensive abstinence classes have been

Sex Ed. should be available in all schools in Texas and should be free and easily accessible to students in any school. Teaching students about human sexuality and the consequences that come along with it at a young age will more than likely prevent them from engaging in sexual activities which will lead to a lower probability of receiving a sexually transmitted disease or a human immunodeficiency virus. Sexual Education classes will help our teenagers and if the country provides these classes for everybody, it will start to see a decrease in teen pregnancies and the amount of STD/HIV infected teens. All adolescents will benefit from these programs since it teaches the realities about teen’s sexual lives and elaborates on the topics that abstinence only programs are forbidden to speak out. Sexual Education in public schools will create the results that Texas has been wanting, not the lessons of “Abstinence

Growing up in Washington, a significantly liberal state, I had a much different education of sex than those here in Texas. Although, most of my group did, as none of us are originally from Texas. For me though, this meant sex education multiple times throughout my grade school education. In the Pacific Northwest, you are taught not only what sex is, but also how to protect yourself. This included everything; from reproduction,

Federal funding has played a large role in this increase, as monetary incentives have been the driving force behind much of the change. To put it in numbers, the amount of federal dollars going to schools that adopted abstinence only programs almost tripled in the seven years between 1998 and 2005, increasing from 60 to 168 million dollars a year (Santelli, 75). And among United States school districts that changed their policies, twice as many chose to adopt a curriculum that more heavily focused on abstinence only until marriage as moved towards a more comprehensive program (Landry). This disturbing statistic shows how effective the religious right has been in pushing abstinence only programs in face of a dearth of evidence as to their effectiveness. This effectiveness is mainly due to intense lobbying funded by individuals and organizations on the far right. One man, Raymond Ruddy, has personally put 1.5 million dollars towards advocacy and lobbying for abstinence only programs (Eaton). While lobbying like this commonly happens on both sides of the aisle, in this case public opinion goes against what people like Raymond Ruddy say is necessary. According to a recent study, "Ninety-eight percent of parents say they want HIV/AIDS discussed in sex education classes; 85% want 'how to use condoms' discussed; 84% think sex education should cover 'how to use and where to get other birth control,' and 76% want

Considering the fact that many students are failing to acquire any factual information on sex takes a toll on the state of Texas costing taxpayers big money. In the state of Texas, abstinence is currently being taught without the emphasis of the greater risk involved. Although, it's great to educate them to

Sex education is an educational program that educates young people about sexual relations with accurate information. Most sex education programs are funded by other sources like the government or state. The schools can offer sex education but are limited to the abstinence only programs because that is the cheapest one and it mainly focus on waiting until marriage to have sex. Each requires some form of sex education to be taught in schools, but each state is very different and all states give the parents the right to choose if the students can take the class. Alabama’s attitude toward comprehensive sex education is negative. Alabama’s attitude on abstinence program is positive. Alabama brings outs the negative sides of having sex before marriage like the horrible idea of getting an STD or becoming pregnant. There are very few studies done on southern states attitudes on sex education.

Sex education has been an ongoing debate for decades. In the early 1970’s, twenty states voted restricting sex education from the school curriculum, leaving the District of Columbia and only three states (Maryland, Kentucky, New Jersey), requiring schools to teach sex education. By the mid 1980’s, a deadly disease permitted through sexual intercourse was recognized; the fear of catching a disease sex education quickly became accepted. In 1986, Surgeon General C. Everett Koop felt sex education should start as early as third grade stating, ‘“There is now no doubt … that we need sex education in schools and that it [should] include information on heterosexual and homosexual relationships. The lives of our young people depend on our