Abstinence Only Programs?

[Debora123]

Please read before answering poll:

So abstinence only programs seemed like a great idea until evidence showed that they did not work and actually increased teen pregnancies and abortions.

thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/state-issues/125059-cdc-finds-stark-regional-disparities-in-teen-pregnancy-rates

My question is, what do YOU think public high schools should do? Continue to give “abstinence only” a shot, or stick with safe sex education? What is the lesser of 2 evils - safe sex ed or increase in single teen moms and abortion?

Please vote on the poll and preferably provide a brief explanation for your answer.

PS - Remember, the above poll applies to public high schools only.

 

[Debora123]

Personally, I find myself very devided on this issue. I am a huge advocate of saving sex for marriage, but at the same time I can’t change the fact that abstinence only programs have failed miserably. And I understand that teen pregnancy and abortions are very big problems in this country, and need to be reduced as much as possible. I have not answered this poll yet and am torn between the 3rd and 5th option…

 

[Debora123]

Personally, I find myself very divided on this issue. I am a huge advocate of saving sex for marriage, but at the same time I can’t change the fact that abstinence only programs have failed miserably. And I understand that teen pregnancy and abortions are very big problems in this country, and need to be reduced as much as possible. I have not answered this poll yet and am torn between the 3rd and 5th option…

 

[JoArtist]

Well I would be all for abstinence only sex-ed if it worked. But statistics show that it increases teen pregnancies and the number of abortions. I would rather some kids use some condoms then taking the lives of their unborn children. I know I will be totally ripped apart for answering like this, but I really don’t care. As someone who has known too many young girls who have had abortions and even some kids I went to high school who contracted HIV as young as 14, I know abstinence only is not enough.

 

[manualman]

Definitions, as usual, help a lot. It’s absurd to believe that education can discuss sexuality and simply pretend that sterilization and contraception don’t exist. That head-in-sand approach is utterly different from an educational approach that discusses marriage, human sexuality, parenthood, STD and pregnancy risks of fornication, attempts at blocking those risks (i.e. condoms), and the reality of the utter failure of ‘safe sex’ programs compared to historical sexual behavioral models. This latter approach includes explaining the rationale and function of pills and condoms, but also debunks the prevailing myth that the use of these things makes fornication “safe.” Polls and studies in my experience (such as this very poll here) bundle these two distinct approaches together with the premeditated intent to discredit the latter along with the former.

No amount of spinmeistering can change the fact that we once had a society and culture that saw sex, marriage and babies as a completely interlinked subject. We’ve tried in the last 50 years to make them 3 separate topics and have collectively made royal asses of ourselves in the process. It’s time they were taught about once again as inevitably linked issues. Separating them is like trying to break the law of gravity: you can’t break it, you can only suffer the consequences of trying.

But even worse than the head-in-sand approach is the “Oh you’re going to do it anyways, so be sure to use protection approach.” Might as well drive them to a whorehouse while you’re at it.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

As far as I can remember, sex education has always been a big joke. I think they should not teach it in public school at all. Stick to real education.

 

[Job42]

The problem is the culture and not that abstinence-only is by nature unappealing to teens. Get these kids to wake up to the messages they are being bombarded with. The kids probably get this message from teachers who merely pay lip service to the idea. Then at the end of the day they drive home listening to “Girl I Wanna Get You Pregnant” by R-Kelly and get home in time to watch “Jersey Shore.” Then they call their friends to go see “The Hangover.” (I am talking about kids here, adults are free to do all these things if they want). All this while the parents either look in the other direction, or even give encouragement. Is it any mystery then that they would find abstinence to be unrealistic and embarrassing? If the adults actually bought into the abstinence idea and promoted it with passion, the kids would wholeheartedly accept it.

 

[Debora123]

The problem is the culture and not that abstinence-only is by nature unappealing to teens. Get these kids to wake up to the messages they are being bombarded with. The kids probably get this message from teachers who merely pay lip service to the idea. Then at the end of the day they drive home listening to “Girl I Wanna Get You Pregnant” by R-Kelly and get home in time to watch “Jersey Shore.” Then they call their friends to go see “The Hangover.” (I am talking about kids here, adults are free to do all these things if they want). All this while the parents either look in the other direction, or even give encouragement. Is it any mystery then that they would find abstinence to be unrealistic and embarrassing? If the adults actually bought into the abstinence idea and promoted it with passion, the kids would wholeheartedly accept it.

So do you think schools shouldn’t touch on the subject at all?

Of course, the ideal solution would be to change our culture to relate sex to marriage… but in the mean time, in the short term, what do you think should be done about this in schools? (if anything at all)

 

[followingtheway]

Of course, the ideal solution would be to change our culture to relate sex to marriage…

The school could do that but when it comes up to the kids it’s a different story. In my school it’s not “cool” to be a virgin (mostly if you’re a guy). Being a virgin isn’t viewed too highly and people use “virgin” as an insult in my school and often reference the word negatively.

It’s a low mentality which I am glad I have not fallen into. The majority of my friends and the people in my school have pre-martial sex. Virgins, Born Again Virgins, and Abstinent people are a minority.

Some kids are going to have sex, so if we eliminate safe sex education, people are still going to disobey the abistinence policy. And even worse, since there’s no safe sex ed around, that means no condoms, which means more STD’s and unplanned pregnancies which could eventually lead to abortion.

It should be up to the parents to decide whether to teacht their kids to be either abstinent or not…

 

[Job42]

So do you think schools shouldn’t touch on the subject at all?

Of course, the ideal solution would be to change our culture to relate sex to marriage… but in the mean time, in the short term, what do you think should be done about this in schools? (if anything at all)

I know what should NOT be done, and that is for the schools to teach “safe sex” to these kids in any way, shape, or form. I guess sex ed should be left up to parents unless somebody can convince me of a reason why abstinence should be promoted in the schools.

 

[Lokabrenna]

I don’t think abstinence-only programs are the way to go. I do think that we need to teach kids that abstinence is the way to go if you don’t want to risk getting pregnant/getting someone pregnant or catching an STI, since it’s pretty hard to get pregnant or pick up a condition related to sex if you aren’t having sex in the first place. However, in the event that they aren’t perfect little angels–and many of them aren’t–they need to learn how to minimize the risk that one of these things might occur.

That said, I never received sex education in either elementary or high school (because of my disability, I was excused from P.E., which was also health class). Fortunately, I wasn’t interested in dating or “experimenting”, but if I had been, I wouldn’t have known the first thing to do about it. I don’t have children, but I think I’d prefer it if they’d get their sex talk from either me or a qualified teacher instead of going to their friends or getting it from firsthand experience.

 

[runningdude]

I think the only way to dispel the safe-sex and contraception myth is to be fully educated about the topic. It needs to be discussed from a health perspective, a moral/ethical perspective, and a historical/cultural perspective.

Seeing the big picture that sex places in our culture needs to be critically examined. TV shows for instance, show sex happening “off screen” all the time, but the contraception isn’t show. The pain of break ups is sometimes shown, but very few consequences or diseases are mentioned. Pregnancy sometimes happens unexpectedly on TV, but rarely is abortion discussed as a possibility, and the consequences of such a decision are even more rarely shown.

Kids need to see that sex is heavily distorted, and given an education that helps them think critically about it, rather than be blindly sold on its appeal. “Sex Education” needs to be dramatically expanded throughout the curriculum.

 

[Corki]

But even worse than the head-in-sand approach is the “Oh you’re going to do it anyways, so be sure to use protection approach.” Might as well drive them to a whorehouse while you’re at it.

Well said. We don’t teach our children to only drive the back roads if they drive drunk or how to shoplift without getting caught.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Please read before answering poll:

So abstinence only programs seemed like a great idea until evidence showed that they did not work and actually increased teen pregnancies and abortions.

thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/state-issues/125059-cdc-finds-stark-regional-disparities-in-teen-pregnancy-rates

My question is, what do YOU think public high schools should do? Continue to give “abstinence only” a shot, or stick with safe sex education? What is the lesser of 2 evils - safe sex ed or increase in single teen moms and abortion?

Please vote on the poll and preferably provide a brief explanation for your answer.

PS - Remember, the above poll applies to public high schools only.

Disagree that abstinence education does not work. I think you should have abstinence programs in schools, but I also think as part of that there be truth told about contraception i.e. the fact that condoms have a 15% failiure and one in 250 fails etc. Expose the myths of the safety of contraception. These studies show abstinence education works:

Administration for Children and Families (ACF), a division of HHS, The American Public Health Association’s (APHA): citizenlink.com/2010/08/obama-administration-blocks-release-of-pivotal-hhs-abstinence-study/

Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine: townhall.com/columnists/LindaChavez/2010/02/05/abstinence_education_works_after_all

Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine: washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR2010020102628.html

nationalreview.com/articles/229086/killing-abstinence/robert-rector

ncregister.com/daily-news/abstinence_education_works_for_high-risk_youth

 

[1ke]

So abstinence only programs seemed like a great idea until evidence showed that they did not work and actually increased teen pregnancies and abortions.

The morality of something is not based upon its efficacy.

My question is, what do YOU think public high schools should do? Continue to give “abstinence only” a shot, or stick with safe sex education?

A school should teach about sexual reproduction in the context of biology-- plants, animals, people.

What is the lesser of 2 evils - safe sex ed or increase in single teen moms and abortion?

You have not listed two evils. You have listed one moral good (abstinence), and one moral evil (contraception). Therefore, there can be only one choice. One may never do evil even to attempt to bring about a good.

PS - Remember, the above poll applies to public high schools only.

This has no bearing on the morality of contraception. Contraception is a grave evil, always.

 

[Simpleton]

I don’t know something tells me if abortion was illegal “abstinence only” would probably have a higher rate of success. Personally I think abstinence only is the only ethical approach since promoting safe sex is basically telling children to put on a condom and be a salve to all of their sexual urges rather than practice self-control. One of the big issues in my opinion is the popular belief that sex can be used as some sort of casual recreational something to do when your bored activity. Maybe someone should factor in the pregnancy rates based on the boredom levels of each state and see if there is a correlation between the two? Second biggest issue would be the content on network tv…I mean you can’t really blame abstinence only for failing when the first thing these kids see when they turn on the tube is Beyonce in spandex shaking her big booty next to a shirtless muscle man: or Lady Gaga humping the closest thing with a pulse. Heck lets add the latest fashion trends to these poles and see if thats contributing to the problem? I mean you cant even go outside anymore without running into someone who’s workout suit leaves little to the imagination.

In short I think there are too many factors that contribute to making teenagers overly stimulated to just blame “abstinence only” as being a complete flop.

 

[Rence]

Please read before answering poll:

So abstinence only programs seemed like a great idea until evidence showed that they did not work and actually increased teen pregnancies and abortions.

thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/state-issues/125059-cdc-finds-stark-regional-disparities-in-teen-pregnancy-rates

My question is, what do YOU think public high schools should do? Continue to give “abstinence only” a shot, or stick with safe sex education? What is the lesser of 2 evils - safe sex ed or increase in single teen moms and abortion?

Please vote on the poll and preferably provide a brief explanation for your answer.

PS - Remember, the above poll applies to public high schools only.

I think they should teach both abstinence and safe sex classes. T

Deborah, the whole problem is basically that people’s moral values have changed and that’s a fact. While the members of CAF can argue about what should and shouldn’t be done, the fact is, “what shouldn’t be done” according to CAF is what’s actually being done in the real world outside of Catholic online forums. Adults are out having sex with people two which they are not married. So kids are out having sex, getting pregnant and, as evidenced by your article, it’s only getting worse. Should basic moral values be taught at home? Yeah. I think so. But the problem is, it’s not being done. So here we have the State, AGAIN, paying for people’s indescretions in the form of WIC, food stamps, health insurance, etc. for all pregnant women and GIRLS who can’t afford to do so on their own. I’m surprised they don’t mail out little pink packages to people’s homes with ABCs in them, with a few condoms for good measure.

People can dislike it all they like, but the fact is, until things change, and people’s values change and reflect in their kids, the State WILL try to do it for them in the form of Sex Education classes. Don’t like it? Then teach your kids at home.

At the nearest high shool where I live, 13 out of a class of 50 became pregnant. That’s nuts. When 13 out of 50 children get pregnant, it’s not the kids’ fault, it’s the parents’ fault for not providing enough direction.

Until people STOP taking government handouts when they need them, and instead, find solutions to their own problems, the government will try to find ways to lessen it’s burden. If people don’t like it, they can pull their kids out of public funded schools and send them to completely private funded schools, and then they can dictate the curriculum. Better yet, they can do their jobs and teach their kids before the State has to.

 

[Debora123]

The morality of something is not based upon its efficacy.

Never said it was.

A school should teach about sexual reproduction in the context of biology-- plants, animals, people.

Yes, it should. I’m referring to sex education in the context of how to approach sex as a human being. Do you think schools should do abstinence only, safe sex, or neither?

You have not listed two evils. You have listed one moral good (abstinence), and one moral evil (contraception). Therefore, there can be only one choice. One may never do evil even to attempt to bring about a good.

Yes I have. Two evils - teen pregnancy/abortion, teen safe sex education. That’s two moral evils.

This has no bearing on the morality of contraception. Contraception is a grave evil, always.

So what was your choice on the poll?

 

[Debora123]

After reading these posts and thinking about the issue further, I have finally voted.

I voted for “mostly emphasize abstinence but also provide safe sex education.”

It’s definitely a tough question and there is no perfect answer, unfortunately. All we can do is pick the best one.

 

[Debora123]

I think they should teach both abstinence and safe sex classes. T

Deborah, the whole problem is basically that people’s moral values have changed and that’s a fact. While the members of CAF can argue about what should and shouldn’t be done, the fact is, “what shouldn’t be done” according to CAF is what’s actually being done in the real world outside of Catholic online forums. Adults are out having sex with people two which they are not married. So kids are out having sex, getting pregnant and, as evidenced by your article, it’s only getting worse. Should basic moral values be taught at home? Yeah. I think so. But the problem is, it’s not being done. So here we have the State, AGAIN, paying for people’s indescretions in the form of WIC, food stamps, health insurance, etc. for all pregnant women and GIRLS who can’t afford to do so on their own. I’m surprised they don’t mail out little pink packages to people’s homes with ABCs in them, with a few condoms for good measure.

People can dislike it all they like, but the fact is, until things change, and people’s values change and reflect in their kids, the State WILL try to do it for them in the form of Sex Education classes. Don’t like it? Then teach your kids at home.

At the nearest high shool where I live, 13 out of a class of 50 became pregnant. That’s nuts. When 13 out of 50 children get pregnant, it’s not the kids’ fault, it’s the parents’ fault for not providing enough direction.

Until people STOP taking government handouts when they need them, and instead, find solutions to their own problems, the government will try to find ways to lessen it’s burden. If people don’t like it, they can pull their kids out of public funded schools and send them to completely private funded schools, and then they can dictate the curriculum. Better yet, they can do their jobs and teach their kids before the State has to.

Thanks for the thoughtful post. I agree.