The Issue Of Sex Education

Modern era sex education programs in the United States began in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a result of the AIDS/HIV epidemic. With the introduction of curricula teaching safe sex and the effectiveness of contraception, other curricula refuted these ideas thus creating a conflict about sex education in the U.S. Sex education in the U.S is divided into two categories: abstinence-only and comprehensive, the former being the most implemented among states nationwide. Abstinence-only programs stress the importance of abstaining from sex until marriage, fitting the “traditional” set of American morals. Covering more than just abstinence, comprehensive sex education programs not only teach students about the options they have when it comes

During 1920s, U.S. schools began to incorporate sex education to their courses. A 2002 study conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that “58% of secondary school principals describe their sex education curriculum as comprehensive programs provide factual information about birth control, sexual transmitted disease, and continue the message to children about waiting to have sex.” (Johannah)

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

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

The push to reduce teen pregnancy started with the Adolescent Family Life Act 1981 which promoted abstinence. The SIECUS says that, “The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Act (TANF), better known as ‘welfare reform,’ was signed into law in 1996 and established a new federal funding stream to provide grants to states for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs.” Since the inception of the abstinence-only movement, more than $1.5 billion has been spent on programs whose only purpose is to teach abstinence (Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc., 2005). Texas has been one of the largest recipients of this federal grant

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

The United States has some of the highest teen pregnancy rates among developed countries (Stanger-Hall, 2011). In states where abstinence-only sexuality education is very strict, there is no data to support decreasing incidences of teen pregnancies. In fact, teen pregnancies rates are almost twenty percent higher in states where abstinence-only education is heavily stressed compared to states with no mention of abstinence at all. Because teen pregnancy rates and stricter abstinence-only curriculums are directly proportional, this would indicate abstinence-only education is not having the desired effect on students that educators are hoping to have. Comprehensive sexuality education could possibly result in a decline in teen pregnancy rates by providing factual information about pregnancy and

As sexually-transmitted diseases and teen pregnancy numbers increase, arguments regarding sexual education classes being taught in high school have been continuously debated: Does abstinence-only sexual education classes work, or do they encourage students to become sexually active? Sexual education in high school has never really been as analyzed as much as it has been over the past decade due to the rise in sexual nature of the world today. Teenagers are exposed to the work of becoming a parent and the embarrassment of diseases through various types of media without explanation of prevention and actual consequence, such as the show 16 & Pregnant. Because of the constant display of the reprimands of unsafe sex, teenagers

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

To understand the shortcomings of the current sex education curriculum, one must first examine the structure of the present system and those who create it. The idea of an abstinence-only curriculum became a dominant force within the education system in the early 1970’s when nearly half of the states voted to restrict and or abolish sex education. It was not until the mid-1980’s and the

Both opposing types of programs agree on this fact, that abstinence is the safest route. The abstinence-only program however, goes about teaching teenagers this in the wrong way. These programs preach abstinence yet leave teenagers uninformed about other sexual health topics, this is best illustrated through a recent survey involving 12,00 young people. It found that those taking chastity pledges had sex on average 18 months later than the national average. However 88 percent of these teens went on to have sex before marriage. Worse yet, those who took the pledge were less likely to use contraception, only 40% of the males used condoms (Kristof A.21). In modern America, where, statistically speaking (Feijoo), teens are likely to have sex and where

According to the Journal of Adolescents between fiscal years 1997 and 2008, the federal government provided more than $1.5 billion to education programs focused solely on abstinence until marriage. Federal guidance prohibited programs using these funds to discuss contraceptive methods, except to emphasize their failure rates. Through the funding the abstinence only program has not been effective, the Journal of Adolescents stated that “...abstinence-until-marriage programs are ineffective in delaying sexual debut or reducing sexual risk behaviors among sexually experienced teen”. Although the U.S. government ignores it, adolescents have a fundamental human right to accurate and comprehensive sexual health

Many topics around the world spark controversy within social dynamics. Sex education, is a big controversy today expressed throughout every nation. The controversy originates from the simple fact that all people are different. Every person was brought up separately and therefore everyone has a different religion, culture and belief that leads up to different opinions in the matter. Sex education is widely debated because many people have different views on whether we should educate our children about sex, and on what we should teach them about. Although many believe that teaching our teens about sex is morally wrong, not educating the nation's youth about sex will cause more detrimental problems in our adolescence social

Across the United States of America there is wide spread support for abstinence-only education. A majority of states require that abstinence-only education be the only form of sexual health education provided, or requires that abstinence be stressed above other forms of sexual education. These highly stressed abstinence-only programs are under fire as research comes out against the efficiency of these programs, and as new forms of sexual health education appear. These new programs teach that abstinence is the best method for avoiding sexually transmitted diseases and unintended pregnancy, but also teaches about using contraceptives to reduce the risks of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, and/or the Human Immunodeficiency Virus. These programs also teach interpersonal skills to allow students to explore their inner selves. Not surprisingly, it is comprehensive sex education programs which help adolescents remain healthy and avoid negative sexual health outcomes.

What is sex education today? Current educational policies mandate a comprehensive education while simultaneously avoiding the issue of explicitly approving or dissenting sexual behavior. On the contrary, most courses attempt to inform sexually active individuals about safe sex rather than encourage any particular practice. Why would educational statutes be wary of encouraging sexual practices of abstinence or otherwise? According to David Rigsby, author of Sex Education in Schools (2006), "Variations of