The Adolescent Family Life Program Teaches Teenagers About Abstinence

Studies show that the national average for an adolescent’s first sexual intercourse encounter is seventeen years old. Despite this number being very close to the average age in other industrialized countries, the United States holds a higher percentage of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease (STD) contraction than those countries (Harper et al, 2010, p. 125). It’s becoming evident that while a majority of the nation’s youth is sexually active, they are not doing so with the appropriate knowledge to keep themselves and others healthy.

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.

In 2005, nearly half of all high school students have had sexual intercourse. Plainly stating that abstinence programs do not work (USA Today). Abstinence programs were beneficial many years ago, but since they are ineffective in delaying teen pregnancy, then teen pregnancy rate has increased. Abstinence programs teach the “no sex until marriage” clause, but they don’t teach teens about birth control and the consequences of having sex at before they’ve matured. Although many studies argue that abstinence programs are educational and beneficial, other studies will show that they don’t delay teen sex, they don’t prevent the spread of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), and are a waste of taxpayers’

"Approximately four million teens get a sexually transmitted disease every year" (Scripps 1). Today’s numbers of sexually active teens differ greatly from that of just a few years ago. Which in return, projects that not only the risk of being infected with a sexually transmitted disease (STD) has risen, but the actual numbers of those infected rise each year as well. These changes have not gone unnoticed. In fact have produced adaptations as to how society educates its young adults about sex, using special programs, various advertising, and regulating sexual education courses in public schools. One major adaptation is the advancement and availability of

The issue of the paper Misinformed and Unprotected is that Abstinence-only programs lack to inform teens about sexual contact because the system is current set up as only teaching teens to not have sexual contact till marriage, leaving out important information for teens who what to learn how to be safe with sexual contact. The writer’s position on the paper is that the education system should be changed to inform teens more than just wait till marriage to have sex. The evidence list is that Abstinence-only education advocates claim that abstinence-only programs prevent premarital sex, but that the programs need to stop being publicly funded because these programs may make those who have suffered from sexual abuse feel ashamed and unwilling

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

Does “abstinence-only” programs mean abstinence-only lives for teenagers receiving this type of sexual education? There are those who fully support abstinence-only sex education while others deny its ability and believe it only under educates teenagers. From the latter, the author claims that abstinence only programs are not effective. He presents evidence to suggest this is valid, including that high school students need medically accurate information on how to decrease their risk of sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy because they are sexually active. Though the underlying issue has merit and the argument is sound and is valid because of logical

A good example of primary prevention is to educate about healthy and safe habits. Passing on knowledge to everyone is a safe way to eliminate disease and hazards. Educating uninformed people about healthy habits is the best way to cure. Another aspect primary prevention brings to the table is the ban or control on the use of hazardous products or to ultimately apply safe practices. So, if people are encouraged to use seat belts when they drive, or wear helmets when they ride bikes, this will decrease the amount of injuries. Primary prevention stops the illness or injury from ever occurring which decreases the number of

"abstinence-only" sex education programs have been shown not to be successful in reducing adolescence sexual behavior. Just a few abstinence-only have been shown to change attitude towards abstinence over a short period up to six months. Educating youth with the skills and tools to make healthy choices about sex and relationship is more effective than denying it and telling them not to have sex. We need to give young people accurate sexual information if we want them to take responsibility for their well-being rather than eliminate information about condoms and birth control. Studies shows over two-thirds of Canadians have sexual intercourse before age 20 (Matika-Tyndale, Barrett, & McKay, 2001) so it is crucial that youth receive all the

During my childhood and adolescent years, I grew up in a highly Roman Catholic family who established firm rules about remaining abstinence untiled marriage and refusing to cohabitate with a significant other. Based on my past history of worshiping my faith, this religion has strong beliefs of being abstinence, not getting pregnant before marriage, and remaining heterosexual. During my adolescent years, my mother continuously stated how the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) population was committing sins and wondered why God created these “creatures”. In addition to my mother’s statements towards this population, it made me furious that we judged this population and questioned their happiness. In regards to Tristan’s faith

In 1981, the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA) was signed into law by President Reagan. Through the act, the federal government first invested in sexual education programs, all of which encouraged “chastity and self-discipline.” After this came the Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage program, which was created in 1996 as part of the welfare reform legislation. Finally, the Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE), was created in 2000. Now, for over three decades, people are still debating whether the original approach of teaching abstinence should be kept or if schools should go into further detail in teaching how to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and infections from happening.

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

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).

      Teenage unplanned pregnancies continue to increase and the Aids epidemic is still wiping out entire populations rapidly worldwide. Here in the United States we hear little about the ongoing battle that is being fought between parents, educators and government officials, with the outcome having a significant impact on our children's lives. Programs that teach sex education in the classroom and promote distribution of condoms are constantly under siege by radical groups who believe very strongly in their religious teachings and choose to ignore the truth. The sex education programs are having an immediate impact on the choices the teenagers are making who attend them. To date any abstinence only

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,