In a society where teenagers engaging in sexual activity is continuously rising, it is important to be open minded about the education and care that goes into these teenagers about sexual education. Two options for these teens are abstinence only education, and allowing contraceptives to minors. Each of these methods receive backlash because of ethical reasoning. Parents do not want to hear about their children being taught about contraceptives and gaining access to them, while critics of the “abstinence-only” education believe that it is not effective on its own. Of those who do not believe abstinence only education is solely effective, many are supporters of introducing a broader education that treats abstinence as a way to avoid pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections(STIs), but to also include information about contraceptives and condoms (Alford, 2007, par. 1). In two separate polls done by the Kaiser Family Foundation, National Public Radio, and Harvard University, and the National Women’s Law Center and Planned Parenthood Federation of America, each received similar results: 85% of Americans believed that schools should teach a comprehensive curriculum on sexual education. Along with the 93% of Americans that want youth to wait for sexual activity until marriage, 99% want programs to include information on STIs and HIV. Another 83% want students to learn how to put on a condom (Alford, 2007, par. 9). Based on information and statistics that denounce the effectiveness of abstinence only education, the writer believes that students and teens should have a better access to contraceptives. As stated under the Fourteenth Amendment, a teenager has the right to access contraceptives. Additionally, teenage contrac... ... middle of paper ... ...ted standard for sexual behavior. By this standard, teens who do not follow those same cultures and religions are being forced to comply with the education. In actuality, the median age for sexual activity is 17, and the average marriage age is 25.8 for women and 27.4 for men (Alford, 2007, par. 16). One other important counter argument is the possibility that access to contraceptives will make teenagers more likely to engage in sexual behavior. Although this theory could easily be confirmed, there has been no medical evidence to suggest an increase in teenage sexual behavior (Lu, 2010, par. 17). Works Cited http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/597-abstinence-only-until-marriage-programs-ineffective-unethical-and-poor-public-health http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/family/lawstudents/2010schwab1_lu.authcheckdam.pdf
Nineteen-fifty five marked the debut of sex education programs in schools in the United States. Along the years, many have argued whether or not sex education should be taught in schools. Many believe that the education of sex encourages students to engage in sexual activities which lead to a higher number of pregnancies and sexual transmitted diseases (STD’s). As the number of unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases climbs higher and higher every day in our country, one can only think that sexual education is a necessity in our school systems. Teens as young as fourteen years old have admitted to already engaging in sexual activities. No teen should be engaging in such acts at that age. Many schools give parents the choice to have their child opt out of the lesson or class. Few states are required to teach sex education to students in secondary schools unless they were withdrawn from the class by their parents.
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).
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).
Collins, Chris, Priya Alagiri, and Todd Summers. "Abstinence Only vs. Comprehensive Sex Education: What Are the Arguments? What Is the Evidence?" AIDS Research Institute. University of California, San Francisco, Mar. 2002. Web. 19 Feb. 2011. .
Freely accessible birth control for teenagers has always been a topic of debate, but it prevents pregnancy, abortion, and it also has many health benefits. There are cons to the argument that suggests a rise in promiscuity in the adolescent demographic, but in spite of these cons the rise of birth control continues, because access to birth control helps adolescents make an informed and safe decision on whether or not to participate in sexual activities. It doesn’t make the decision for them.
In the article, “More Schools to Teach Abstinence-Plus,” as seen on page A21A of the September 16, 2011 issue, author Morgan Smith tells her readers about new programs being introduced in West Texas to tech teenagers about not only abstinence, but additional how to practice safe sex. The article explains how teenage pregnancy rates in West Texas continue to spike despite the effort to push abstinence on teens. It explains in detail of a new sexual education program where teens are encouraged to choose abstinence but are educated in effective contraception as well. It covers schools in Midland, Texas and how endeavor to switch policy’s is embraced by the majority of community members as an active approach to decrease teen pregnancy. (Smith 1)
Abstinence-Only programs are currently the most used in public schools, but this method is seriously out-dated and does not aptly deal with the issue that teenagers are participating in underage sex regardless of whether they have been told that they should not. Without the proper information, teenagers are blindly making a decision about having sex that could impact their lives in far many more ways than they can fathom, most not fully understanding the ramifications of their decision. The implementation across the nation of a comprehensive Abstinence-Plus program teaching: abstinence, health risks, birth control, teen pregnancy, and providing students with information and birth control is exactly what is needed.
Congress hereby finds and declares that the sex education curriculum has been wrongly denied of pursuing a thorough course in order for high schoolers to achieve a better understanding of anything sex related. Sex education, or sex ed, is an instructional course built to instruct issues relating to human sexualiy, sexual anotomy, sexual reproduction, sexual activity, reproductive health, emotional relations, reproductive rights and responsibilities, and contraceptives. Out of the 50 states in the U.S, only 18 of them are required by law to include a sexual education course available in all high schools. Of the 18 states that are required sex ed however, their curriculum differs. In some states such as Utah, youths learn about sexual education, STD’s, and abstinence until marriage, but are not provided information about contraception. In other states like Washington, teens receive information ranging from homosexuality to contraception methods. States like Utah that promote ‘abstinence-only’ sexual education courses are less effective than those like Washington, where a more in-depth sex ed course showed evidence of no encouragement of sexual activity. Washington used the comprehensive sex education program. The method that Utah used, “Abstinence-only” or “Just Say No” teachings, in spite of the fact that it educates youth on how to reject sexual advances, promote self-sufficiency, instruct the psychological health of youths who have had sex, etc. are biased and prejudiced. This bill will lower the teen ...
In the United States today, many teenage girls are facing lots of problems. New problems are rising such as an increased pregnancy rate among teenagers. Our teenage girls are less developed and unprepared for the problems which come along with their decision to have sex. It is also too early for teenage girls to become pregnant. Many teens think having a baby is some sort of joke. They believe it will never happen to them but the reality is that every time teens have sex, there is a possibility that the sperm will find its way to the egg if they do not get protection. As a nation, or society, it is in our common interest to protect our teenage girls from getting unwanted or unplanned pregnancy. However, this issue of protecting or preventing our teenage girls from pregnancy plays a dynamic role and is a matter of choice. Many parents and educators have long argued over whether teens should get a comprehensive sex education or abstinence only education. The question is which of these programs is more effective at stopping teen pregnancy. To prevent teenage pregnancy, the United States, should force schools to teach comprehensive sex education for many reasons. For many people, instructing teenage girls about the usefulness of birth control and condoms is more important than just simply mentioning to avoid sex until marriage. Comprehensive sex education is needed to teach teens about the usefulness of condoms.
“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). These shocking statistics are conspicuous to any ordinary American, yet the United States schools have taken little initiative to teach effective sexual education. Sex education programs in the U.S. mainly fall under two categories – comprehensive or abstinence-only. Abstinence-only sex education programs present abstinence as the only effective means to prevent teenage pregnancy and sexual transmitted diseases and infections; whereas comprehensive sex education programs teach abstinence as a secondary choice, while also informing students about birth control and contraceptives. Comprehensive sex education should be the only sex education method taught in schools because it is the most effective technique to keep students well-informed, prepared, and safe.
Sexual education should be taught in school, but as an abstinence-only program. According to Robert Rector, a researcher for the Heritage Foundation, abstinence-based sexual education reduced teen sexual activity. In fact, it has helped to reduce the amount of teen pregnancy (Teens at Risk, 1). Some may say that comprehensive sexual education is better because it “prepares” the teens for what might happen during sexual activity, but here it will be shown that is not always the truth.
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.
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.
Three million teenagers will contract a sexually transmitted disease and one in three women will become pregnant before they are twenty years old. Teens are contracting sexually transmitted diseases and getting pregnant at an alarming rate causing the government, schools, and parents to scratch their heads. America is the country with the highest teen pregnancy rate in the world. Many are wondering what can be done to stop this. A debate has been going on about whether abstinence only education is doing any good for high school students in America. Abstinence only education teaches teenagers to abstain from all sexual acts until they are married. It does not teach about pregnancy or the different types of contraceptives that are available to prevent pregnancy. On the other hand, there is safe sex education. Safe sex education teaches teenagers facts about intercourse they need to know, acknowledges the potential consequences or risks of sexual behavior, and helps them make better decisions to protect themselves and their bodies.
Sex education in our schools has been a hot topic of debate for decades. The main point in question has been whether to utilize comprehensive sex education or abstinence-only curriculum to educate our youth. The popularity of abstinence-only curriculum over the last couple of decades has grown largely due to the United States government passing a law to give funding to states that teach the abstinence-only approach to sex education. But not teaching our children about sex and sexuality is not giving them the information they need to make well educated decisions. Sex education in our schools should teach more than just abstinence-only because these programs are not proven to prevent teens from having sex. Children need to be educated on how to prevent contracting sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies and be given the knowledge to understand the changes to their bodies during puberty. According to the Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education: Kindergarten-12th Grade from the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), comprehensive sex education “should be appropriate to age, developmental level, and cultural background of students and respect the diversity of values and beliefs represented in the community” (SIECUS).