Personal Narrative: My Abstinence Of Peer Health Exchange

The teenagers and children of today read about, listen to and watch all sorts of information about sex. While most adults have had some form of sex education, we must ask if this new generation is learning anything new or helpful from their sex education classes. The American culture and way of living is so absorbed in sex that children should be taught about it, people just can not agree on how to teach them. In her article New Sex ed Funding Ends Decade of Abstinence-Only, Kelli Kennedy proves that abstinence-only sex education classes and programs are not as good as regular sex education classes better than Shari Roan does in her article Teen pregnancy rates rises. Are abstinent-only programs to blame?

The philosophy behind abstinence-only policy implies that the greatest risk of informing students about their options for contraception would be that educators are condoning premarital sex. The risks that our students are already taking, however, are greater then policymakers are considering. It is generally accepted that the majority of sexual intercourse among young people remains unprotected (Westwood, 2006). Abstinence-only curriculum is not preventing adolescents from having sex; it is just making them naïve to the risks they are taking with their lifestyle choices.

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

Imagine if the United States said “Okay, we’re banning driver’s Education in schools. We don’t think a sixteen year old is mentally and physically prepared to drive safely, and we don’t want to encourage that”. So of course, schools start pulling driver’s ed classes, but also say “Wait wait wait, sixteen year olds may not be ready to drive, but they’re going to anyway. Why not make it safer for them instead of putting them out on the road with no safety knowledge?” But, the country continues to say “They’re not ready so we’re not going to encourage that in schools” Sex education isn't just about pregnancy, it's about avoiding STDs and other health issues. The highest teenage STD rates are normally associated with abstinence-only education. Some STDs will cause life-long problems, and should be taught about to teens. Although there is an attempt to minimize teen pregnancy and stds, the rate of teen pregnancy is higher in the U.S. than other Western countries, Among teens aged 18–19, 41% report that they know little or nothing about condoms, and 1 in 4 teens in the US receives information about abstinence without receiving any information or instructions about birth control.

Opposition of the Abstinence-Plus program centers around the belief that by comprehensively informing students about sex, and responsible practices, in addition to supplying contraceptives, will send a message that not only is it okay to have sex but here have a condom to do it with. In some cases, they actually suggest the importance of telling students that condoms are “ineffective and do not work“ (Teenage Sexuality 205). Over the past few decades, several attempts have been made to “scare” teenagers away from sex. “In the sex-education video No Second Chance, a young man asks the teacher what if he does not to wait until marriage to have sex. She replies, “Well, I guess you’ll just have to be prepared to die” (Talk About Sex 117). The intended message was that condoms do not work in effectively preventing HIV. This is

“Don’t have sex because you will get pregnant and die!” (Mean Girls). This famous quote said by Coach Carr, the health teacher, in the movie Mean Girls swarms the brains of teenagers all over the world. While this quote is quite extreme and is making a mockery of abstinence only programs, it’s analogous to what teachers across the nation are reciting to brainwash our youth. Abstinence-Until-Marriage programs are implemented in numerous high school and junior high schools across the country. While the title seems promising, “Mathematica [Policy Research Inc. (on behalf of U. S. Department of Health and Human Services) found that through] evaluation, [there’s] no evidence that abstinence-until-marriage programs increased rates of sexual abstinence” (What the Research Says…). Teaching a course that isn’t beneficial is meaningless and merely a waste of time. These curriculums use fear tactics to scare children away from sex, reinforce gender norms, and provide inaccurate medical information. Schools that provide abstinence only programs are denying our youth factual, substantial knowledge and survival skills. Instead, these schools should consider an abstinence-plus program, also known as a safe sex contraception education, for their students.

“The United States ranks first among developed nations in rates of both teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases” (Stanger-Hall, Hall, “Abstinence-Only Education and Teen Pregnancy Rates”). According to several studies, this is mainly due to the fact that numerous states teach abstinence-only education, which usually does not include material on contraception, STIs, nor pregnancy. The alternative to abstinence-only education is referred to as comprehensive sex-education, where the practice of abstinence is promoted, but students are additionally taught about contraception, STIs, pregnancy prevention, and interpersonal skills. Despite the beneficial results of this alternative, abstinence-only education is still taught all over the

The classes proved information about contraceptives, STDs and HIV prevention. It also is age appropriate and scientifically explained. Collins says it well that “by denying teens the full range of information regarding human sexuality, abstinence-only education fails to provide young people with the information they need to protect their health and well being.” Students when asked survey by the Kasier Family Foundation said that they knew more and felt better prepared to handle different situations. Abstinence only education just chooses to avoid it and does not take into account students who decide a different path. Abstinence only education supports say that by teaching the “abstinence-plus” education that they are sending mixed messages towards students. Current advocates for comprehensive education cite that “providing teens with contraceptive information does not encourage early sexual activity.” The Surgeon General David Satcher had said that based off of the information he had derived from both approaches “evidence gives strong support to the conclusion that providing information about contraception does not increase adolescent sexual activity….[it only] increased condom and contraceptive uses among adolescents who were sexually active.” (Collins 9)Most evaluations of many different types of

Comprehensive education teaches students about contraception, including emergency contraception, reproductive choices, LGBT issues, anatomy, and other traditional topics, including abstinence, as part of the curriculum, because of this comprehensive education is referred to by some as abstinence plus. (“Comprehensive Sex Education vs. Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage-Programs”) Comprehensive education focuses on giving student options on how to manage if they do choose to have sex. As the average age at which Americans start having sex drops, teaching students about how to prevent or deal with sexually transmitted diseases and avoid unplanned pregnancy becomes increasingly important. (“Sex Education Promotes Understanding and Safety”) 34% of sexually active students said they didn’t use a condom the last time they had sex, which is what increases the odds of getting an STD or becoming

Not only does abstinence only education exclude adolescents of various sexualities, but it fails to regard the health of teenaged girls as well. The repression of female representation in health courses has contributed to the magnification of the gender stereotypes, where women are ideally portrayed as pure vessels if they remain virgins until marriage. Therefore, young girls should remain chaste and pubescent boys naturally have a rampant sexuality due to their uncontrollable hormones. Traditional gender roles are then reinforced, disregarding female sexuality thus alienating them within their health courses since they are not educationally included. This form of instruction censors out necessary sexual guidance concerning their respective reproductive health. For example, details about contraception, abortion, human sexuality, and sexual assault specifically concerning females are neglected within the classroom. Health courses have long-established condoms as the popularized and primary way of having protective sex. But what school boards don’t incorporate in their curricula is that there are various methods of contraception, precisely for women. For example, there are birth control pills, hormone implants, cervical caps, and vaginal rings. Although these preventative measures do not safeguard for STI and HIV contraction, they can decrease the likelihood of having an unintended pregnancy by ceasing ovulation or preventing sperm flow in the vagina by increasing the hormones

If you have lived through the experience of being a teenager in the United States then you have probably been subjected to a sex education course at some point in your life. I, like the majority, attended an abstinence-only program in high school and most of what I remember from that experience is being uncomfortable. In fact, the clearest memories I have of the program taught at my school, or Worth the Wait, is of a video of a woman who creates a pancake in the shape of a vagina for her daughter and a montage of dozens of girls saying “No!” to emphasize what my response should be to sex. But, now that I am an adult woman and am close to the age where I might start thinking about motherhood I can see why these abstinence-only programs

Programs that encourage abstinence have become a vital part of school systems in the US. These programs are usually referred to as abstinence-only or value-based programs while other programs are called as safer-sex, comprehensive, secular or abstinence-plus programs which on the contrary promote the usage of effective contraception. Although abstinence-only and safer-sex programs disagree with one another, their core values and stand on the aims of sex education is to help teens develop problem-solving skills and the skill of good decision-making. They believe that adolescents will be better prepared to “act responsibly in the heat of the moment” (Silva). Most programs that have been currently implemented in the US have seen a delay in the initiation of sex among teens which proves to be a positive and desirable outcome (Silva).

Sexual education is a highly debatable topic, but many believe the information taught to students should be abstinence-only. Abstinence-only education has been put in place in order to educate students about the social, mental, and physical benefits of resisting from all sexual activity. It emphasizes the unsafe impacts of participating in sexual activity before marriage and having casual sex. It also promotes the idea that sexual abstinence is the only way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease. Abstinence education only permits the discussion of contraception and condoms in terms of failure in order to utterly discourage casual sex (Wilgoren, 1). Along with teaching the physical dangers of sex, abstinence education also teaches the mental dangers of sex (Abstinence-Only Education, 1). Sex has many risks and dangers that are not

These assemblies proved to reduce statistics in birth rates among many races because of the abstinence-only education. There is no doubt that abstinence is a great and the most pure way to protect oneself from an unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. On the other hand, Ann O’Leary stated in Beyond Condoms: Alternative Approaches to HIV Prevention, “…adolescents, particularly young adolescents, may not have the knowledge and judgment to make informed choices about methods to protect themselves…” It would not hurt to take an extra step for those who were not taught or do not have any idea what abstinence is. Also in Beyond Condoms: Alternative Approaches to HIV, O’Leary says, “It may be reasonable to admonish young people to abstain from alcohol or drug use… but asking adolescents to abstain from sexual intercourse may be qualitatively different.” Teaching students about abstinence and providing them with condoms seems a bit hypocritical, but for people who have already taken that extra step to have sex, why not help protect them? For kids who do not have that motherly or fatherly figure to sit down and talk to them about the “birds and the bees” at the age of 13, and already made the mistake, why not take the extra step to inform and also

Coinciding with the onslaught of the new millennium, schools are beginning to realize that the parents are not doing their job when it comes to sexual education. The school system already has classes on sexual education; these classes are based mainly on human anatomy. Most schools do not teach their students about relationships, morals, respect, self-discipline, self-respect, and most importantly contraceptives. Everyday students engage in sexual activity, many of them with out condoms. This simple act jeopardizes these students' futures and possibly their lives. An increasing amount of school systems are starting to combine messages involving abstinence from sexual activity,