The Separation Of Sex Education

As a result of high percentage of pregnancy and childbirth among teenagers; which often result in unfavorable health, social and economical issues, there are various types of laws regulating sex education in middle schools in different states. According to National Conference of State

In 1913, sex education became a topic that was found to be an important education tool. Since then, this form of education has been a hot and debatable topic among many Americans. The original reason for sex education classes was to reduce problems such as sexually transmitted illnesses and prostitution. In recent years, abstinence has become the focus of sex education curriculum. Abstinence means refraining from sex completely. Although, it is the only one-hundred percent way to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies, abstinence-only instruction should not be the only form of sex education taught. Our youth need to know about all aspects of sex. This intails how to protect them if they choose to become sexually

It’s safe to say that most of our school systems today use the “Abstinence- Only” approach. School systems teach sex education classes in middle school, where most students will not be in a situation where they must use the information used in these courses, such as contraceptives. In middle school, it is best to learn the Abstinence Only approach, while becoming a high schooler, it would be more effective to use the Safe- Sex approach to increase their knowledge on the consequences of sex. While reading an article, a high schooler engaged in a sex education class said,

I believe that all schools should teach an inclusive form of sexual education. I believe that teaching abstinence is not working in the slightest because the rate of teenagers who are sexually active is gradually increasing. Since the fact is that teens are participating in sexual intercourse, we need to teach them how to have sex safely. Schools need to teach a form of sexual education that will fully cover how to prevent teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and infections, because the abstinence-only-until-marriage programs contain inaccuracies and flaws, the popular opinion differs from state policies, and the government and tax payer’s money could be better allocated to a different cause. Ultimately teaching proper sexual education will help to lower the teenage pregnancy

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

However, controversy arises when the discussion as to what the proper method of teaching sexual education should be. In the school system of the United States sex education is taught in two main forms: abstinence-only sex education, which focuses on abstaining from sexual activity prior to marriage and does not provide contraceptive knowledge, and comprehensive sex education, which focuses on sexual health as a whole including knowledge about contraceptives and how to avoid STDs. Currently the only federally funded programs implemented in public schools are abstinence-only. But does Abstinence-only sex education work? In order to provide an answer this paper will discuss the basic principles and practices which constitute abstinence-only sex education, the proponents argument for abstinence-only sex education and how abstinence-only education affects teen pregnancy and STD

An alarming rate of Sexually Transmitted Infections and Pregnancy among teenagers has been an ongoing concern and could be linked to the lack of sex education in schools. Statistics show that 3 in 10 teenagers are becoming pregnant every year, and 1 in four teenagers are contracting sexually transmitted infections. There are numerous opposing views towards the teaching of comprehensive sex education in school districts. Many people are opposed to this because they believe that it encourages premarital sexual promiscuity in young adults, is destructive to religious belief, and is inappropriate and harmful. “Comprehensive Sex Education Is Inappropriate and Harmful” is and article that provides concrete evidence, for example, it states in the article that “Teens enrolled in these classes are given false information about how pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases can be avoided and may actually be encouraged to engage in activities that could lead to sexual intercourse” which is quite the contrary. My personal view is that as a nation we should be teaching students comprehensive sex education also known as abstinence plus, because it will better educate students and save money. Comprehensive sex education stresses the importance of abstinence, but also provides important information for the prevention of STI’s and unplanned pregnancies. I believe this needs to be taught in schools because I come from a school that taught abstinence only and nothing more, and the number of

There is much controversy over which form of sex education should be taught, comprehensive sex education, or abstinence-only sex education. The definition for comprehensive sex education is responsible and balanced sexuality education that seeks to assist young people in understanding a positive view of sexuality, provide them with information and skills about caring for their sexual health, and help them acquire skills to make decisions now and in the future. It is medically accurate and provides information about abstinence and contraceptives as tools to prevent unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. On the other hand, abstinence only sex education is a form of sex education that teaches abstinence from sex. This type of sex education promotes sexual abstinence until marriage and avoids discussion of use of contraceptives. Comprehensive sex education goes against some family morals and encourages teenagers to have sex. But abstinence only sex education does not teach students enough about sex or how to protect themselves from STDs and pregnancy. Comprehensive sex education should be mandatory in all of our nation’s schools.

The criminal justice has variety of jobs that make up the system. There is a system known as the correctional system also known as the penal system . criminal justice system which additional included policies, prosecution and courts. Everyone who takes part in corrections, law enforcement , and courts come together and contribute to criminal justice.

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

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

In an article entitled, “Comprehensive Sex Education for Teens is More Effective than Abstinence only programs,” from the American Journal of Nursing, emphasized that there is a need for qualified sex educators to provide sex education to students in secondary schools. The article highlighted that the current laws, on sex

Sex education in the United States has many different opinions on the most effective ways of teaching. Social trends, public health concerns, politics and various controversies have all, at different times and in different ways, affected the substance and teaching of sex education (Future of Sex Education). 15 percent of Americans believe abstinence-only sex education should teach only about abstinence and nothing else, however 46 percent believe abstinence and ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies STD’s should also be taught (Future of Sex Education). Abstinence-only sex education programs are ineffective compared to comprehensive sex education programs and are very costly within the government.

Picture a young couple being on the verge of exploring their sexual desires for the first time. The question is does this young couple have the proper education to make this life changing decision? They most likely were given their education from the school they attend. Hopefully the school taught them what they needed to know to make such a decision. Should sex education be taught at school by teachers or by the parents?

There are many states that do not provide the kind of sex education that New Jersey strives to convey to its students. It more often than not ties in with the religious right proclaiming that students are too young to be exposed to sexual material, and thus sexualized as a result. These fundamental groups oppose any suggestion towards a comprehensive approach. Instead, they ask that their children be taught after grade school and additionally, they steer towards ‘abstinence-only’ education. Instead of teaching students how to protect themselves, they teach that the only way to protect oneself is by abstaining from sex. The problem arises, then, when these students decide to have sex. They are unaware of how to conduct themselves responsibly, how to take precautions to prevent against unwanted pregnancy and disease. What kind of ‘education’ are students receiving when they are withheld crucial information?