Sex Ed

[Ivellious]

I was wondering, what are your views on sex education in high school? Different states in the US handle this issue completely differently, with the south typically taking an "abstinence only" approach where sex is not discussed or explained, but rather students are told not to have sex, period. Northern, more liberal states tend to give students a sexual education including information on birth control, STDs, and (sometimes) abortion.

I personally find the comprehensive sex ed far more valuable than abstinence only.

So, what do you think? Does Christianity have any impact on how sex ed should be handled in schools?

[jlay]

I'm 41, from the bible belt in the south, and sex ed was taught in my HS back in the late 80s.

Abstinance should be promoted. It is sure fire protection against STD and pregancy. There is little evidence that sex ed in schools helps reduce teen pregnancy or STDs.

[Ivellious]

Actually, you are flat-out wrong on that point. In the south, where sex ed is not commonly taught (in favor of abstinence only sex ed), the teen pregnancy rates are undeniably higher:

http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/nati ... 20Only.pdf
http://womensissues.about.com/od/dating ... States.htm

Both of these illustrate what the conservatives don't like to see...Not giving your children access to information about sex and simply telling them not to have sex does nothing but hurt the cause. Teens who choose to have sex in the north, where they actually learn about safer sex and birth control, and where it isn't as heavily stigmatized to get birth control, are rather obviously having less pregnancies and less teen parents are the result.

Besides, even in the north, abstinence is the choice that is always given as the best option. Contrary to the beliefs of some conservatives, the comprehensive sex ed is not telling kids to go do it...rather, they are told that abstinence is the best option, but if you do choose to have sex, here is how you can reduce the chances of an unwanted prenancy or STDs.

[Canuckster1127]

I'm 49 and I was raised in Canada where things are considerably less of an issue than here in the US. Part of that is probably that in Canada only about 10% of the population describe themselves as evangelical whereas in the US the percentage, depending on region can go as high as 33%.

The sticky part in all of this is that there's a very fine line between what is informational and what serves in the minds of others as equipping with knowledge to promote certain behaviors. Perspectives will vary on where that line is. Overall, I think one things is probably pretty clear and that is that ignorance overall doesn't work. Further, there isn't anything other than the public school system which has the reach and the impact to educate toward ends that even though they have moral elements also have corresponding social impact in the arena of disease control and economic and social impact of unplanned pregnancies.

Ultimately however, I think that when it comes to issues of conveying moral values that that is primarily the responsibility of the parents. So, I support the school system providing minimal and basic information as to risk associated with behaviors and ways to mitigate it. Beyond that I believe it's up to the parents even though I know there's good arguments that enough parents don't address things directly enough. The school system that my children are in (I have 5) have in the past, sent home material in advance of Sex Education, providing an outline to us as parents as to what will be covered and giving us the option to opt our children out. Thus far we haven't done this. What we have done is in a low-key way try to talk with our kids before or after the material at school and include in that conversation a moral context based upon what we believe. It's not a perfect system perhaps, but I haven't seen a better one yet.

[Ivellious]

That's interesting. I think in 5th/6th grade our parents were able to opt out of the "puberty" section of health in school, but I'm fairly certain sex ed is a required part of 11th grade Health class where I am.

[Reactionary]

I was wondering, what are your views on sex education in high school? Different states in the US handle this issue completely differently, with the south typically taking an "abstinence only" approach where sex is not discussed or explained, but rather students are told not to have sex, period. Northern, more liberal states tend to give students a sexual education including information on birth control, STDs, and (sometimes) abortion.

Here in Croatia, we've had a similar situation - there's been a debate between a "liberal" and "conservative" view on how sexual education should be organized. However, the differences were too intense, so a resolution, as far as I know, still hasn't been come up with. When I was in HS, which wasn't that long ago, we were taught briefly about the topic as a part of biology class, but I doubt how much of it took root in the youngster's heads. Still, the stats show that the number of teen pregnancies, as well as abortions, is relatively low. I couldn't manage to find exact figures though.

I personally find the comprehensive sex ed far more valuable than abstinence only.

So, what do you think? Does Christianity have any impact on how sex ed should be handled in schools?

I definitely agree that "abstinence only" approach - in the sense of making sex a taboo topic - wouldn't do much good. Instead, we need to give teens rational reasons to abstain from sex at least until they reach a certain level of maturity. Which can hardly be reached before the age of 18, in my opinion.

The impact of Christianity? Well, if a country is secular, I don't think that explicitly invoking Christianity in government school sex ed would do much good either. Whenever you do something like that, you get an army of anti-religious parents protesting how the education system, funded by their taxes, infringes their children's freedom of (from) religion.

I believe that a comprehensive, detailed sex ed should be implemented, while advising the teens to think carefully before getting involved in sex and possibly abstain until a reasonable age. The rest should be left to the parents, as I believe that, for the children, they are a higher authority than the education system anyway. At least that was my impression - what we learned at school didn't seem to be taken too seriously. There was a "We-know-it-all-already-because-we're-experienced" attitude in the air, but at the same time I heard about some tragically funny questions and situations that reflect a lack of knowledge on the issue. Personally I think that teens, at least in my country, don't practice sex as much as it's believed. The reason, however, is not intentional abstinence, but rather a lack of self-confidence caused by a fear of embarrassment.

[jlay]

I,

I think you are reading more into what I am saying. The studies on sex ed are not conclusive. I appreciate the stats you provided, but there isn't a way to correlate those to what you are saying. The stats certainly don't make that claim. It is speculative on your part. And there are many factors which can contribute to higher rates in the South.

Not saying there aren't claims for effectiveness, but Sex Ed is a billion dollar business competing for dollars. Abstinance is the only 100% effective method. Sexual activity among teens is a reality and I am not naive. I think if there are sex ed classes that they should promote abstinace. The criticism is against abstinance only. And in a sense I agree. If the government is going to take on the role, then it should be comprehensive.

[inlovewiththe44]

I'm just speaking from personal experience here.

I, in your original post, you made it sound like the schools that promote abstinence (which is the safest policy if nothing else) do not teach anything about sex in any way shape or form. I only just graduated from high school. When I was in health/PE, we learned about STDs and contraceptives; I am not sure what else was covered, since it's been four years. Reproduction was covered pretty well in my Biology 1 and AP Bio classes. You make it out like the schools that teach abstinence act like sex doesn't exist and doesn't have consequences.

[Ivellious]

inlovewiththe44,

Then you got essentially what I consider "comprehensive sex ed." When I say "abstinence only" sex ed, I'm referring to the idea that schools should simply tell students not to have sex and end it there. That view is typically a conservative idea, whereas the more liberal side is more like what you got, where abstinence is encouraged but the students are also given information on contraceptives like birth control, and other ways of protecting themselves if they choose to have sex.

Again, in no way does any school that I know of promote promiscuity or sexual activity during sex ed. The difference is whether sex ed covers safer sex tools, or just abstinence.

And jlay, I agree that abstinence is the best route for young people to take, and again the schools regardless of where they are do promote it. I'm simply against the idea that not talking about sex at all beyond "don't do it" is the best route, because it doesn't do anything at all. The rates of kids having sex is probably similar in the north and south, but the difference in whether they are getting the information and access to birth control etc. is the difference.

[jlay]

The rates of kids having sex is probably similar in the north and south, but the difference in whether they are getting the information and access to birth control etc. is the difference.

Outside of your opinion, do you have any objective studies that directly are able to tie higher rates in the South to how SE is taught?

FYI, My grandmother, and great grandmother were pregnant teens. Of course they were married, and stayed married their entire life.

[Rob]

That view is typically a conservative idea, whereas the more liberal side is more like what you got, where abstinence is encouraged but the students are also given information on contraceptives like birth control, and other ways of protecting themselves if they choose to have sex.

Please explain to me how that view is a "conservative" idea.

[Ivellious]

I admit, I hadn't looked into the research heavily, but I found a ton of material supporting my stance.

http://ari.ucsf.edu/science/reports/abstinence.pdf

This clearly outlines both the research done on abstinence-only and comprehensive sex ed (on page . It very clearly shows the only positive data for abstinence only are unfounded or not scientific, and there is extensive research demonstrating the effectiveness of a comprehensive sex education including information on birth control.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/ ... 7820.shtml

Here is a more direct overview of one study that shows significant decrease in the rate of intercourse and pregnancy among teens with a comprehensive sex ed class as opposed to abstinence only.

Don't take this next part offensively: I admire your relatives for keeping their marriages together. But, first of all, that was a far different time than today, one where a teen girl was for all intensive purposes required to marry if she got pregnant regardless of the circumstances, and divorce was not an option for many people (particularly in the religious parts of the country). And I'd also like to point out that just because it worked out in your family doesn't mean it's ok to dismiss the problems with rising levels of teen pregnancy.

[Ivellious]

Rob, typically abstinence only sex ed is taught in highly conservative regions of the US, and in particular religious conservatives push the idea the hardest. More liberal areas tend to favor comprehensive sex ed, citing research and not being as worried about sex ed breaching some kind of moral/religious code against it. Like all issues, not all conservatives like abstinence only sex ed, and not all liberals prefer comprehensive sex ed. It's just typical.

[domokunrox]

I put absolutely no faith in the education system. Here in the US, they can't even teach other subjects well, what's makes anyone think that "comprehensive" sex ed will work?

Sex ed needs to be taught by parents and its needs to be comprehensive there.

If it were up to me, I would make separated schools for boys and girls mandatory from 6th grade on. I would make community service punishment for fraternizing or receptiveness to it.

I would also make school on Saturday mandatory. Half day.

[Rob]

If it were up to me, I would make separated schools for boys and girls mandatory from 6th grade on. I would make community service punishment for fraternizing or receptiveness to it.

I would also make school on Saturday mandatory. Half day.

Was this a joke?