(no subject)

Mar 28, 2006 11:07

One controversial aspect of sex education in schools is content. Some think the focus should be the biology of sex and reproduction- a "plumbing approach." Others suggest that personal responsibility and moral development should be included.

When we teach nutrition, we don't only teach healthy ways to live, right? They teach what eating bad things, drinking and smoking will do to you. They also teach preventative measures, like if you're going to eat three hamburgers a day please take a brisk half hour walk several times a week. Why can't we teach sex ed the same way?

"At this point, the egg matures and ovulation occurs. If a sperm meets the egg at this point or in the next few days, the egg may become fertilized and implant itself in the fertile uterine wall. If it does not meet a sperm, maturation continues and menstruation occurs. This cycle can be interrupted by hormones that prevent the egg from maturing and ovulation from occurring. If an egg is fertilized other hormones can prevent the uterine lining from accepting it. These are generally pills or shots used as forms of birth control."

Something like that? it's not telling kids to use it. it's simply explaining the mechanics of it. My Bio 2 book had a two page insert on the biology of birth control and it's fascinating! It was one of the most valuable things I learned in school, and it wasn't part of the Bio 2 curriculum and wasn't included in any of my Health classes that were supposed to teach sex ed!

rant, why?

Previous post Next post
Up