After the crisis of the Human Immunodeficiency virus in the 1970 's to 1990 's, many concerned American citizens started to look for a method for preventing the spread of the sexually transmitted diseases and infections. Originally schools started to teach an abstinence only curriculum. Eventually there was a gradual exchange from an abstinence only curriculum to a curriculum extensively filled with sexual education, from contraceptives to sexually transmitted infections. Many argue that comprehensive sexual education is more effective than an abstinence only education.
Keri Vermillion and Mary Kuk were interviewed on the topic of abstinence and sexual education by Edward T. Lenning. Mrs. Vermillion is the current health teacher for South Umpqua
…show more content…
The studies found that adolescents who are taught abstinence only education and make a pledge to remain celibate until marriage are four times more likely to perform anal sex, and to not know how to use a condom properly (Hunter). With this study, opponents of abstinence only curriculums, such as Hunter, argue that it is likely that adolescents who are taught an abstinence only curriculum will not know the risks with participating in unsafe sex. Vermillion stated that teaching students how to properly use a condom, or to at least know how to read the directions on the condom boxes, is one of the most important lessons in a sexual education curriculum (Vermillion). Proponents of abstinence education argue that condoms have a margin for error in preventing the transmission of sexual infections and diseases. This argument is answered by proponents of sexual education by claiming that using a condom is considerably safer than when no protection …show more content…
Vermillion continues that parents are not likely to do a good enough job to educate their children on such topics (Vermillion). Kuk concurs with Vermillion 's statements on that sexual education should be done at the teen 's home (Kuk). Both of the health teachers who argue for sexual education agree that parents have a responsibility to teach their children about the ideas of sexual education, arguments state that those who are against sexual education should restrict the abstinence education to only their homes and not the schools (Vermillion). Even as children may or may not be taught in their homes by those who advocate abstinence, Mrs. Vermillion argues that sexual education in public schools should start in the sixth or seventh grade (Vermillion). Advocates for sexual education, such as Susan Hunter, argue that on a regular basis, teenage students are not taught proper information on how to protect themselves (Hunter). Mrs. Vermillion and Mrs. Kuk both agree on that informing students of the importance of protection can be the most critical in prevent sexually transmitted diseases
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...
The primary argument which most advocates for abstinence only education have is that sex before marriage is immoral, not appropriate and that abstinence is the only completely effective method of preventing teen pregnancy and STI contraction. These advocates also emphasize that condoms are not a sure-fire way of preventing pregnancy and STI contraction. Many of the proponents for abstinence-only education believe that educating youth with information concerning sex and contraception will embolden them to become to begin or increase sexual activity. Such advocates accredit the lowering of teenage pregnancy to abstinence only education (Collins, Alagira, and Summers 12-13).
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).
“Throughout the 1980’s these arguments began to lose legitimacy as the American republic reiterated its support (Fose)”. “Although this topic is highly debated, 93 percent of Americans support “sex or sexuallity” courses being taught in high school and 84 percent supports teachings in junior high (Fose)”. More people requested sex education because of the AIDs epidemic. The AIDs epidemic cau...
Two drastic Emergency Room cases were handled in 1998 at Mary Washington Hospital. Concerned mothers brought their 12 year old daughters into the hospital thinking they were suffering from severe stomach pain or even appendicitis…both girls were actually in labor (Abstinence, 2002). The United States has the highest teen pregnancy, birth, and abortion rates in the Western world (Planned Parenthood, 2003). Are teens getting enough knowledge on sex and how to prevent STDs and unwanted pregnancies? Another heartbreaking statistic is that teenagers have the highest rate of STDs of any age group, with one in four young people contracting an STD by the age of 21 (Sex-Ed Work, 2003). Is sex education really working in school? Or do we need to change the type of curricula that is taught? There is no question that sex education should be taught in schools, but the question is how? The purpose of this paper is to determine which curricula of sex education should be taught in schools to be most effective in lowering STD and pregnancy rates among teenagers.
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...
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...
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. .
... abstinence provides such as a decreased risk in contracting STIs and HIV. Lowen has a B.A in English and attended graduate school for communications at Syracuse University. She also received the Exceptional Merit in Media Award from the National Women 's Political Caucus in 2009. Throughout her piece, she states that abstinence promotes focus in school and decreases a teen’s emotional vulnerability. She also adds that abstinence is free and doesn’t come with any side effects, whereas other contraceptives do such as birth control pills. I will use this source to support my counterargument and to emphasize the importance of abstinence, especially when it is a personal choice. I will also use this information to explain why abstinence and comprehensive education should be taught together in order to have an effective sexual education course in middle and high schools.
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.
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.
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).
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...
Before moving on, one must know that sex education is about, but not limited to the discussion of sexual intercourse. As a Buzzle article states, it involves a multitude of topics that introduce human sexual behaviors such as puberty, sexual health, sexual reproduction, sexuality, and more (Iyer). If formally received in school, these topics are brought up and discussed at age-appropriate times over the course of children’s junior high and high school education. Moreover, as I have introduced earlier, the way sex education should be taught is divided into two approaches. It is between taking either a conservative, abstinence-only approach or a more liberal, comprehensive approach. Abstinence-only education, approaches students by stressing the importance of “no sex before marriage” as be...