Comprehensive Sex Ed. Programs vs. Abstinence Only Programs
Sexual education programs taught in high schools nationwide would be much more effective if instead of focusing exclusively on abstinence only programs, they taught a much more comprehensive program, which informed the adolescents how to be safe when it comes to dealing with sexual activities. Abstinence only programs are the widely favored programs of the past and of present time, but now more and more adults are starting to believe their children would be better educated if they were involved in a more comprehensive program, that not only emphasized the teachings of abstinence but taught their children how to be safe, and how to deal with the consequences of their sexual activities. Each program offers a wide array of information, but taking both of those programs and putting them together, will really help teenagers deal with their sexual drive and issues.
In abstinence only programs, of course what is taught is abstinence. In these programs the instructor stresses why practicing abstinence is so important.
“The federal definition of an eligible abstinence-only education program is one that: has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, physiological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity; teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children; teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems, teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects; teaches that bearing children ...
... middle of paper ...
...dies and activities they wish to participate in.
Reference List:
Bohlin, Raymond. (2004). Safe Sex and the Facts. Retrieved on April 10, 2005 from http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/safesex.html
Gordon, Michael. (2002) Abstinence vs. sex ed: What's working?. Retrieved on April 10, 2005 from http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/02/23/abstinence.only.wmd/index.html
Katz, Nikki. (2004). Abstinence Only Sex Education Program in Schools. Retrived on April 13, 2005 from http://womensissues.about.com/od/healthsexuality/i/isabstinenceonl.htm
(2005). Comprehensive Sex Education. Retrived on April 13, 2005 from http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/sexeducation.htm
Pardini, Priscilla. (2002). Federal Law Mandates 'Abstinence-Only' Sex Ed Fundamentalists Pushed Stealth Legislation. Retrieved on April 27 from
http://www.rethinkingschools.org/sex/sexmain.shtml
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 “Safe Sex” (“Sex Education,” 2010).
In other words, these programs preach that completely abstaining from any sexual activity is the only way to avoid potentially devastating consequences, such as teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Although this idea may be true, it is based on the faulty premise that all teens will adhere to such a policy, therefore, eliminating the need to educate them on other precautionary measures, such as contraceptives. Unfortunately, such hopes have proven to be unrealistic, resulting in the need for these programs to be readdressed. As with all issues, there are many evident stakeholders who are continuously affected by Florida’s lack of an effective and standardized sexual education program within its public school system.... ...
Since the HIV/AIDS epidemic began in the U.S. in the early 1980s the issue of sex education for American youth has had the attention of the nation. There are about 400,000 teen births every year in the U.S, with about 9 billion in associated public costs. STI contraction in general, as well as teen pregnancy, have put the subject even more so on the forefront of the nation’s leading issues. The approach and method for proper and effective sex education has been hotly debated. Some believe that teaching abstinence-only until marriage is the best method while others believe that a more comprehensive approach, which includes abstinence promotion as well as contraceptive information, is necessary. Abstinence-only program curriculums disregard medical ethics and scientific accuracy, and have been empirically proven to be ineffective; therefore, comprehensive sex education programs which are medically accurate, science-based and empirically proven should be the standard method of sex education for students/children in the U.S.
Today’s young Americans face strong peer pressure to be sexually active and engage themselves in risky behaviors (Merino 100-109). Anyone deciding to have sex must first think about all the risks involved. Kekla Magoon, author of Sex Education in Schools, says that “half of all teens aged 15 to 19 years old in the United States have had sex” (Magoon 64-65). It is currently not required by federal law for schools to teach Sex education and those few schools that do teach Sex education have the decision to determine how much information is allowed. Advocates from both sides of the Sex education debate agree that teens need positive influences in order to make practical decisions (Magoon 88-89). Opponents of Abstinence-only education believe it fails because it does not prepare teens for all the risks of sex (Magoon 64-65).
Smith, Morgan. "More Schools Choose to Teach Abstinence-Plus." The New York Times 16 Sept. 2011, National ed.: A21A. The New York Times. 15 Sept. 2011. Web. 10 Oct. 2011.
The Federal Government has invested millions of dollars into an abstinence education program for young adults that provide ways for them to avoid sexual activity at such a young age. The program teaches teens the importance of sustaining from sexual activity before marriage and the importance of a monogamous relationship in a marriage. It also teaches them the harmful effects psychologically and physically, of sexual activity at a young age.
National Abstinence Education Association. “Comprehensive Sex Education Is Inappropriate And Harmful.” Do Abstinence Programs Work?. Christina Fisanick. Michigan. Greenhaven Press, 2010. 33-42. Print.
One of the most popular views comes from a moral standpoint, from this stance it is suggested that abstinence only programs are the best and most morally correct way of educating students about sex. In the early eighties the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA) was put into the action, it was also known as “The Chastity Act.” “AFLA focuses on developing programs that promote abstinence as the only option to help young people avoid sexually transmitted diseases including HIV/AIDS and teen pregnancy.” (Perrin and DeJoy 446-47). AFLA caused a lot of controversy over whether this was the best way to educate children about sex. Those opposed to AFLA argue that this method of sex education offers no safe alternative to having sex and is not actually educating students on sex. It is only focused on encouraging students to refrain from sexual activity.
Students should be informed about more than just “don’t have sex” because eventually it is going to happen and they need to be educated on the proper way to handle the situations. Because students are mostly taught abstinence it has created the situation to where researchers find” Abstinence-only education, instead of reducing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, has made teenagers and young adults more vulnerable to ST...
Quindlin, Anna. "Sex Ed." The McGraw-Hill Reader: Issues across the Disciplines. By Gilbert H. Muller. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011. 275-77. Print.
Informing the adolescents of abstinence-only does not educate them of the risks associated with sexual behavior. Providing our adolescents of a more precise sex education program, that includes curriculum on contraceptive, STDs, better communication skills, risky sexual behavior, abstinence, the outcome of teen pregnancy, and include activities that focus on career goals, could reduce the rate of teen pregnancies and protect our adolescents’ health.
(1985) Sexual education and sexual experience among adolescents. American Journal of Public Health: Vol. 78, No. 1, pp. 113-117. 75, No. 58, No.
Abstinence-only sex education is one kind of sex education in the U.S. It is a program which aims to keep adolescents from becoming pregnant by emphasizing the importance of abstaining until they get married. According ...
The government likes to pretend that if high school students get taught the “abstinence-only” method they would never think of taking part in sexual activities. Statistically this is incorrect. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, “56 percent of high school students are virgins”(Martin). For the 56 percent abstinence only is doing them well, but there are still 44 percent of high school students engaging in sex without knowing the precau...
Martinez, Gladys, Joyce Abma, and Casey Copen. “Educating Teenagers About Sex In The United States”. CDC.GOV. Center of Disease Control and Prevention, 15 Sept. 2010. Web. 09 Feb.2014