Congratulations, Texas!
You have spent the last decade in the dark ages, and are now making steps towards returning to the present.
Seriously, if there was any standard of the research that journalist cited in the writing of this article, I find it absolutely galling. Notably:
The American Medical Association adopted a report that found that sex education programs based on promoting abstinence produced "no delay of initiating sexual activity, no reduction in the number of sexual partners and no increase in abstinence."
this:
A study released by Columbia University found that earlier progress in increasing contraceptive use among teens has stalled. Another troubling trend: The CDC reported that birth rates among adolescents ages 15-19 are continuing to increase after years of decline; so are rates of gonorrhea and syphilis infection.
and this:
Sex education is not required in Texas schools, but when offered, it must meet strict abstinence mandates, added to the Texas Education Code in 1995, that are widely interpreted as barring detailed instruction about birth control and condoms.
Among other things, classroom discussions of contraceptive methods must be couched in terms of how often they fail.
Assuming there has been any sort of ethical standard in the research, and they took rigorous steps to eliminate bias from their results (granted, considerable assumptions), this movement has taken us backward far more steps than it brought us forward. Let us look at what is asserted: There has been no reduction in the average age of entry into sexual activity, no reduction in the average number of sexual partners, and no reduction in the number of teens remaining abstinent, there is an increase in the number of teens having children and becoming infected with sexually transmitted diseases, and school districts, when they opt to teach sex education, are required to teach about contraception in such a way that it reinforces how unreliable it is.
I am blown away. Really?
I realize the desire to encourage abstinence, I really do. I'd like to think that my progeny will be responsible and wait until the right time to engage in sexual activity. And to that end, I think it's only right for sex education to make a strong appeal to youths to remain abstinent, but I think it is a serious flaw for our educational system to only teach abstinence education. I fail to see how it's anything short of criminal for educational systems to actively disparage the use of prophylactics. I certainly hope that if children make the decision to engage in sexual activity before marriage, they will do so carefully, using all means to prevent pregnancy and the transmission of disease.
As a postscript to this, I'd like to say that I was a little wary of posting this on here. I know the many people in my group of friends feel strongly about certain issues which this relates to. I just would like for people to know that I do not intend for this to be an attack against religious beliefs or faith in any way. I don't think the great majority of the popular support for "abstinence-only" sex-education is behind it for the sake of religious belief, and I do not believe, by any measure, that the classes are conducted with a religious focus. I believe there is none of the "You should remain abstinent because the Bible tells you so" in classrooms, and I believe the primary impetus behind the desire to teach this viewpoint is because parents, in general, want their children to remain abstinent. No parent wants their child to engage in promiscuous behavior. And so we encourage our children to be good, upstanding individuals. My worry is that we have lost the forest for the trees. There is too much damage to be wrought by pregnancy and epidemic disease.
Oh, yeah... one more postscript. This entry was prompted by a radio talk-show on KRLD that I was listening to the other day. They brought up the research which had been done, and were talking about it with their viewers. Their particular viewpoint on the topic was that sex-education should be nothing more than the "mechanics" of sex and pregnancy, and that beliefs as far as abstinence vs. safe sex should be instilled at home, that it's not the school's place to make that decision for parents. While I... in an ideal world, would agree with this particular view, I feel forced to look at this from a different point of view. Sexually transmitted diseases have reached near epidemic levels.
3% of females aged 15-19 have been diagnosed with Chlamydia.
More than 30% of females aged 15-19 have been diagnosed with HPV.
800,000-1,400,000 people in the United States are estimated to have Hepatitis B.
There are estimated to be more than 1,700 new HIV infections each year, in teenagers between the ages of 15 and 19. This figure only includes 34 of the 50 States. "According to the number of AIDS cases, these 34 states represent approximately 66% of the epidemic in the 50 states and the District of Columbia."
So yes. We have a problem. And we need to stop it. Abstinence has proven ineffective. If anybody can develop a curriculum with comprehensive disease prevention, we need to move in this direction. At this point, it's moving away from being an issue of morality and character, to being an issue of disease control. Left unchecked, we're all in a world of trouble.
Seriously, if there was any standard of the research that journalist cited in the writing of this article, I find it absolutely galling. Notably:
The American Medical Association adopted a report that found that sex education programs based on promoting abstinence produced "no delay of initiating sexual activity, no reduction in the number of sexual partners and no increase in abstinence."
this:
A study released by Columbia University found that earlier progress in increasing contraceptive use among teens has stalled. Another troubling trend: The CDC reported that birth rates among adolescents ages 15-19 are continuing to increase after years of decline; so are rates of gonorrhea and syphilis infection.
and this:
Sex education is not required in Texas schools, but when offered, it must meet strict abstinence mandates, added to the Texas Education Code in 1995, that are widely interpreted as barring detailed instruction about birth control and condoms.
Among other things, classroom discussions of contraceptive methods must be couched in terms of how often they fail.
Assuming there has been any sort of ethical standard in the research, and they took rigorous steps to eliminate bias from their results (granted, considerable assumptions), this movement has taken us backward far more steps than it brought us forward. Let us look at what is asserted: There has been no reduction in the average age of entry into sexual activity, no reduction in the average number of sexual partners, and no reduction in the number of teens remaining abstinent, there is an increase in the number of teens having children and becoming infected with sexually transmitted diseases, and school districts, when they opt to teach sex education, are required to teach about contraception in such a way that it reinforces how unreliable it is.
I am blown away. Really?
I realize the desire to encourage abstinence, I really do. I'd like to think that my progeny will be responsible and wait until the right time to engage in sexual activity. And to that end, I think it's only right for sex education to make a strong appeal to youths to remain abstinent, but I think it is a serious flaw for our educational system to only teach abstinence education. I fail to see how it's anything short of criminal for educational systems to actively disparage the use of prophylactics. I certainly hope that if children make the decision to engage in sexual activity before marriage, they will do so carefully, using all means to prevent pregnancy and the transmission of disease.
As a postscript to this, I'd like to say that I was a little wary of posting this on here. I know the many people in my group of friends feel strongly about certain issues which this relates to. I just would like for people to know that I do not intend for this to be an attack against religious beliefs or faith in any way. I don't think the great majority of the popular support for "abstinence-only" sex-education is behind it for the sake of religious belief, and I do not believe, by any measure, that the classes are conducted with a religious focus. I believe there is none of the "You should remain abstinent because the Bible tells you so" in classrooms, and I believe the primary impetus behind the desire to teach this viewpoint is because parents, in general, want their children to remain abstinent. No parent wants their child to engage in promiscuous behavior. And so we encourage our children to be good, upstanding individuals. My worry is that we have lost the forest for the trees. There is too much damage to be wrought by pregnancy and epidemic disease.
Oh, yeah... one more postscript. This entry was prompted by a radio talk-show on KRLD that I was listening to the other day. They brought up the research which had been done, and were talking about it with their viewers. Their particular viewpoint on the topic was that sex-education should be nothing more than the "mechanics" of sex and pregnancy, and that beliefs as far as abstinence vs. safe sex should be instilled at home, that it's not the school's place to make that decision for parents. While I... in an ideal world, would agree with this particular view, I feel forced to look at this from a different point of view. Sexually transmitted diseases have reached near epidemic levels.
3% of females aged 15-19 have been diagnosed with Chlamydia.
More than 30% of females aged 15-19 have been diagnosed with HPV.
800,000-1,400,000 people in the United States are estimated to have Hepatitis B.
There are estimated to be more than 1,700 new HIV infections each year, in teenagers between the ages of 15 and 19. This figure only includes 34 of the 50 States. "According to the number of AIDS cases, these 34 states represent approximately 66% of the epidemic in the 50 states and the District of Columbia."
So yes. We have a problem. And we need to stop it. Abstinence has proven ineffective. If anybody can develop a curriculum with comprehensive disease prevention, we need to move in this direction. At this point, it's moving away from being an issue of morality and character, to being an issue of disease control. Left unchecked, we're all in a world of trouble.