During 1892, the birth of sexual education began when the National Education Association promoted sexuality education as a necessary part of a national education curriculum. After a few years, schools around the country began teaching sexual education in the classroom. However, it was not until 1996, under the Clinton administration that the federal government established to fund a national program formally called Title V of the Social Security Act. As part of a provision of the Welfare Reform Act, the federal government established a grant to the state for the abstinence-only-until-marriage programs (Title V). The abstinence-only-until-marriage programs was intended to improve health and control diseases for future generations; however, …show more content…
it failed to accomplish anything. As a result of the abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, many students grew up without any informative sexual education, which impacted their sexual relationship, sexuality and gender identity. After a majority rule on the Welfare Reform Act, Congress took about two years to gather the necessary fifty million dollars a year in funding.
Once the funding became available, there were eight very specific requirements that the states had to meet in order to be a recipient of the grant. For example, one of the requirements was “Teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school-age children” (Gavin, "A History of Federal Funding for Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs"). Once the state got the money, they distributed it to the schools and an a sexual education teachers would begin teaching. The sexual education teachers went into the classroom with the expectation to impact the student's life in a positive way. However, after conducting many studies, researchers believe that there has been a negative impact relating to Title V. “Despite clear evidence of failure, the U.S. government continues to fund and promote abstinence-only-until-marriage programs” (Alford, "Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs: Ineffective, Unethical, and Poor Public Health"). As it is easily seen, the government has failed to impact people's sexual life and behaviors; however, continues to fund Title …show more content…
V. After spending 1.5 billion dollars, there were many controversies revolving around abstinence-only-until-marriage programs and the federal government spending habit.
Teachers, students, politicians and many more groups of individuals were opposed of the abstinence-only-until-marriage education; however, promoted an alternative form of education. An education that had medically accurate information such as birth control, pregnancy and acknowledges that there are different types of sexual relationship. For example, Cara Kulwicki the author of Real Sex Education said, “For me, real sex education is something more. I believe that it requires actually teaching about sex. Real sex education requires, in addition to teaching about protection, teaching sex as a normal and healthy part of life that is varied in terms of both preferred partners and preferred acts. Real sex education teaches that sex is more than heterosexual intercourse and should be consensual and pleasurable for all participants” (Kulwicki, 305). Just like many people today, Cara's goals and motivation are to reform sex education so that it becomes comprehensive sex
education. There are three main issues that were discussed in class or in the reading. The first issue is society and culture, which has had a tremendous influence on the norms, beliefs and policies. For example, before Title V, many religious people in society were putting pressure on Congress to pass laws based on personal beliefs instead of ethics. The second issue is reproductive justice, which is defined as “The complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, economic, and social well-being of women and girls, and will be achieved when women and girls have the economic, social, and political power and resources to make healthy decisions about our bodies, sexuality, and reproduction for ourselves, our families, and our communities in all areas of our lives” (Ross, 5). In many of the sexual education lessons, the teachers were not giving students, especially women, healthy decisions about their bodies. As a result, according to Tiloma Jayasinghe, “The war of propaganda creates perceptions that are hard to unseat” (Jayasinghe, 278). Finally, the last issue was in regards to marriage, monogamy, and single living as the only way to live with no other option. The abstinence-only-until-marriage programs was specifically designed to thwart future generations from engaging in any sexual act outside of marriage because of politicians religious beliefs. It is apparent that Title V has had an impact on future generations; however, the question has been, has Title V had a positive or negative influence on the students? After multiple research, Title V has had a negative impact on the students because it fails to give a comprehensive education. Instead of having a one-sided education, only accepting heterosexual relationship after marriage, there needs to be a shift in education that goes into sex, gender, and sexuality. If educations fail to provide the truth today, then many students will be inadequately prepared to fight the problems they might face in the future.
Although tax payers may not directly experience the effects of sex educations programs as much as the teachers, parents, and students, it is important that they’re assured their tax dollars are being used to support a program that better provides the youth with the knowledge and resource to practice safe sexual endeavors.
"US Government Should Stop Funding Abstinence-Only Education: Virginity Pledge Ineffective." Reproductive Health Matters Nov. 2009: 223. Academic OneFile. Web. 4 Apr. 2012.
Everyone has an opinion about sexuality education. From vocal parents at PTA meetings to state governors who must decide whether to apply for federal funding for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs or more comprehensive sexuality programs, or both, or neither. From school pri...
Those in support of Comprehensive Sex education believe that if teens get complete and accurate information about sex, then they will be able to make better decisions (Magoon 57). Even those who remain abstinent until marriage need to be able to recognize an STD because their partner could have made a different decision and not remained abstinent (Magoon 57). There are many groups and organizations that promote Abstinence-only education or Comprehensive Sex education (Magoon 80-81). The debate over Sex education is almost solely a discussion of what is moral and what is practical, says Kekla Magoon (6-95). Abstinence-only advocates main issue with Comprehensive Sex education is the debate of whether or not giving teens more information actually leads them to being sexually active (Magoon 73).
Malone, Patrick, and Monica Rodriguez. "Comprehensive Sex Education vs. Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs." Human Rights Magazine 38 (2011). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. .
Teenage sexual activity is a major problem confronting the nation and has led to a rising incidence of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and teenage pregnancy. The existence of HIV/AIDS has given a sense of urgency to the topic of sex education. The issue of sex education in schools especially in the formative years has been a subject of intense debate among parents, school officials, health scientists and religious authorities worldwide for a considerable period of time. The debate centers on comprehensive sex education versus abstinence-only sex education in school. Abstinence only sex education is a sex education model that focuses on the virtue of abstinence from sexual activities; therefore, encouraging sexual abstinence until marriage. This form of sexual education completely ignores all other elements of comprehensive sexual education like safe sex and reproductive health education issues like the use of contraceptives and birth control methods. Comprehensive sex teaching encourages promiscuous sexual activity as “a natural part of life.” Proponents of abstinence only education activists cite several reasons why this type of education is the best. It focuses on the upholding of moral virtues. They also claim that sex outside marriage hat is “encouraged” by the comprehensive sex education which as a result, has some emotional and physical downfall especially when done at a very young age. They blame the comprehensive sex education for failing to discourage premarital sex especially at this time when the HIV pandemic is busy devouring young people in various parts of the world (Deborah 2). In fairness, both programs were designed to decrease the incidence of STDs...
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.
Sexuality Information and Education Conflict of the United States. (n.d.). An Explanation of Federal Funding for More Comprehensive Approaches to Sex Education.
In the United States, there is a rising problem that is not going anywhere anytime soon, that is if we, as citizens, don 't change it. This problem is causing billions of dollars and people 's futures all because schools would rather teach ignorance than the truth. What’s the problem? Sex education. Although sex education may not seem like a rising conflict, it is actually one of the top controversial topics in our country regarding education. According to Brigid McKeon, “Each year, U.S. teens experience as many as 850,000 pregnancies, and youth under age 25 experience about 9.1 million sexually transmitted infections (STIs)” (McKeon). This number is so unbelievable to any sane person, but somehow schools still won 't take the initiative to teach realistic sex education. Sex education can be taught in two different procedures- comprehensive or abstinence only. The difference between the two methods is that comprehensive sex education teaches abstinence as a secondary choice, so that teens who decide not to wait are well educated on how to keep themselves protected. Comprehensive sex education should be required in every single public school because it is the most effective method on how to keep teenagers well informed and prepared.
Congress has spent more than 1.5 billion dollars in trying to make the rule of having teenagers to promote abstinence until marriage which has been taken into effect into more than 25 years. In April 2007 a federally funded program which is now called Title V abstinence until marriage program was released. Federal has said that the policy was very ineffective. Mathematica’s evaluation towards the abstinence only until marriage program was clearly ineffective and they have found no evidence that they increase sexual abstinence which was the purposed of the whole program. The abstinence program has no impact on teen sexual behavior in November 2007 a reporter called Dr. Douglas Kirby in which he researches which programs would work in preventing
Sexual education has been a heated topic for years. The topic started in 1912 when the National Education Association wanted teachers to begin lecturing in sex ed programs.(Pardini, Priscilla) In 1940 the U.S. Public Health Service labeled sexual education an “urgent need” and strongly advocated it in schools.(Pardini, Priscilla) Though sexual education had support from health officials and educators, there were many opponents.(Pardini, Priscilla) Conservatives and health advisors battled over how sex ed benefits and how it should be taught in schools.(Pardini, Priscilla)
Whereas, the Sexual Education program promotes safe sex and knowledge of the sex and it’s consequences. The motto would be, “Knowledge is Power.” As a result of this program has decreased the rate of unplanned pregnancy and sexual disease outbreak. This is why it is argued that Sexual Education should be taught in the public school system.
The need for sex education is very questionable in today’s society. An article by Pamela DeCarlo, from the Centre for AIDS Prevention Studies, discusses why sex education is needed in schools. She asks why education on this subject is needed and if will help or hurt today’s children. Her view of the issue is that kids do need to have education to help to protect them but that it isn’t enough to prevent them from receiving STD’s and becoming pregnant. “Knowledge alone is not enough to change behaviors.” DeCarlo also says that, “Programs that rely mainly on conveying information about sex or moral precepts-how...
According to World Association for Sexual Health, "to achieve sexual health, all individuals, including youth, must have access to comprehensive sexuality education and sexual health information and services throughout the life cycle" (Sexual Health for the Millennium 4). In the fifteenth century, scientists and educators raised the issue of sex education of children and adolescents. This topic particularly was discussed after the sexual revolution that occurred in the past century, when there were the first attempts to introduce sex education courses first as electives, and then as a mandatory class. Sex education should be taught in schools as a compulsory subject in order to develop knowledge about puberty as well as to prevent unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections.
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.