Direct correlation between number of abortions and increase in sex education?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Linnyo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Linnyo

Guest
This has definately been the case in Scotland. This tells me that the schools are teaching it wrongly. Having spoken to young people about the sex education they have recieved, they have said that the teaching legitimizes sex before marraige. At 12 years old, they are being told sex is great - don’t get caught! They are then being shown how to use condoms at school. This education is meant to reduce teenage pregnancies and it has done the opposite. Politicians say more sex ed is the answer.
 
The whole problem stems from institutions other than children’s parents being entrusted with the responsibility (or having it usurped from them) of education in such matters.
 
The UK is known as a nanny state. Homeschooling is rarely done here and there is little or no support network for it. That isn’t a problem for me cos the cost of living is quite high and we would struggle to feed our family on one salary anyway. It has got ridiculous since the labour government. Schools are even starting to brush the kids teeth and provide breakfasts so some of the parents are sitting back and accepting it all. Not me - I am fairly active and have and will continue to withdraw my kids from things that I don’t believe fit with what I would teach. I am moving both of my girls to catholic schools because teaching about relationships was lacking in their old school. But it is definately the government that is driving the curriculum. Mass brainwashing is what they are doing, IMO. Anyway condoms are given out free to school kids in high school. What does that teach the children? Sex before marraige is fine but try not to get pregnant or get and STD. Oh and you can always have an abotion if the condom breaks.
When I got pregnant with my first child I was 19 and still at university. The doctor didn’t ask me if I wanted an abortion - she tried to talk me into it. When I had a threatened miscarraige I was very scared and I phoned her. She said " Just keep as busy as you can and with a bit of luck you’ll miscarry!" I was really angry. She was also pregnant. I couldn’t understand her attitude at all. But I didn’t complain because I felt very young and she made me feel very stupid. Anyway I got married and had a lovely girl and I am still married and will remain so. She told me I would fail at that too btw.
mapleoak said:
The whole problem stems from institutions other than children’s parents being entrusted with the responsibility (or having it usurped from them) of education in such matters.
Click to expand...
 
I have over the years had many people tell me that sex education is necessary to prevent teenage pregnancies.

And my response is, when I was a teen, pregnancies were rare – and there was almost no sex education. Now we have it all over the place, and we also have a high rate of teenage pregnancy,

Whatever good sex education may produce, reducing teenage pregnancies is not it.
 
mapleoak said:
The whole problem stems from institutions other than children’s parents being entrusted with the responsibility (or having it usurped from them) of education in such matters.
Click to expand...
I agree that no organization should usurp from a child’s parents the right and responsibility to determine the content and timing of sex education.
 
KarenNC said:
I agree that no organization should usurp from a child’s parents the right and responsibility to determine the content and timing of sex education.
Click to expand...
I’m very interested in hearing mapleoak’s response to your post on THIS thread. :rolleyes:
 
Since there are no links I cannot review any findings involving Scotland. However, in the US studies seem to suggest otherwise. The most intriging thing to me is that the teenagers who fair worst appear to be those receiving certain ‘abstinance only’ sexual education. Their abortion and pregnancy rates run highest, and they are most likely to engage in riskier behaviors, like unprotected sex.

Teenagers who receive comprehensive sex education with an ‘abstinance BEST’ theme seem to fair best. In surveys they choose abstinance at a higher rate than their peers and those that do become sexual active are more likely to use contraception.

Contraception, of course, is still a grave moral sin from our point of view. But, from a secular point of view, fewer pregnancies, fewer abortions, and fewer STDs are all considered positives.

I just find it interesting that some programs appear to be worse than nothing at all. But, as Mirdath correctly points out, correlation and causation are two very different things.

Best Regards
 
Mirdath said:
Correlation does not mean causation.
Click to expand...
Very true. Even to show an actual meaningful correlation is a complex task, much less isolating one single factor that can be shown to cause any change that is seen.

Looking for a connection is compounded by the ages at which women are choosing abortion vs the age at which they received sex education in the schools and where they received it, and in the US for instance, compounded by the fact that there is not one single sex ed curriculum for the entire country–it varies quite considerably by state.

You have to look at tons of factors:
  • Women have abortions at all points of their reproductive years, which span several decades. Is the increase true for all age groups or only for those who can be reasonably assumed to have the same type of sex education?
  • where and when did they receive their sex education and what did that curriculum contain (abstinence only? comprehensive? public vs. some sort of private school? in this country or, if immigrants, in another country and what were there sex ed policies and curricula? curricula and standards change over time and location) Is the increase associated with women who have any sex education at all or is it influenced by the type of sex education?
  • potential cultural, economic and religious issues that influence acceptibility of abortion, not just where she lives when she receives the abortion
  • Are there any other factors that might influence it–changing availability of abortion, access to contraceptives, etc?
  • Is the increase true (and true for the same age groups) in other countries with similar access to abortion, contraceptives and similar sex education patterns?
  • Is the increase true for women of all ethnic groups who can be reasonably expected to have received the same sex education or does it vary by ethnic group?
I am sure there are other factors I am forgetting.

The numbers I found for Scotland do show a steady increase in the numbers of abortions
isdscotland.org/isd/files/mat_aas_abort68-98.pdf

In the US, however, the CDC reports that the abortion ratio has been falling since 1984, the number and rate peaked in 1990.

cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5511a1.htm

The Guttmacher Instittute has a report on recent trends in abortion worldwide that might be helpful in seeing if there is a trend in both abortion rates and sex education in various countries, but it only goes to 1998
guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2504499.html

Here’s their report on sex education in America
guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_sex_ed02.html
and
guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3018898.html
 
Karen, what are you doing posting statistics? They’re LIES I tell you…lies!! 😃

Seriously, I should just follow you around today saying “what she said.”👍
 
iamrefreshed said:
I’m very interested in hearing mapleoak’s response to your post on THIS thread. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
What? We aren’t instigating now, are we?
KarenNC said:
I agree that no organization should usurp from a child’s parents the right and responsibility to determine the content and timing of sex education.
Click to expand...
As long as we are not referring to people with signs and billboards as an ‘organization usurping parents rights to how and when they teach their children about sex’, or some such nonsense, I completely agree with this statement.
 
You are right of course karen - there are many things that may have contributed to an increase in abortions
  • breakdown of family values since Labour got in
  • increase in availability of abortions
  • less people attending church or following religious practices
  • increased povery due to high tax (17.5% here plus NI and pension contributions +VAT + tax for absolutely everything the government can get away with)and high cost of housing and living.
  • people developing the opinion that they are ENTITLED to a particular lifestyle (of course, nobody has an entitlement to anything - everything is a blessing at God’s discretion)
  • etc, etc.
    Fact is, there is an increase in number of abortions and some statistician and researcher would be in work for ages trying to figure out why. I think that the standard of sex-ed is problematic.
    Abstinence is teaching from the past and teachers are using progremmes here that legitimise casual sex. casual sex = more pregnencies = more abortions
 
mapleoak said:
As long as we are not referring to people with signs and billboards as an ‘organization usurping parents rights to how and when they teach their children about sex’, or some such nonsense, I completely agree with this statement.
Click to expand...
Why make an exception for yourself?
 
Allan Guttmacher, former president of Planned Parenthood was asked, “What makes abortion so secure in America?” He answered in two words: “Sex education.”
Click to expand...
We covered this on the Life website under Sex Education and Abortion life.org.nz/abortionkeyissuessexeducation.htm

We have covered the topic fairly extensively and include findings from Dr David Paton of Nottingham University Business School (NUBS), and Dutch sociologist Joost van Loon who is a Reader in Social Theory and Director of the Centre for Research in Culture and Communication at Nottingham Trent University, and has written a paper called Deconstructing the Dutch Utopia. In it he argues low teenage pregnancy figures is not due to high-quality, explicit and early sex education.
 
That was an internesting read. It is very clear that the issues regarding abortion are tied closely with education but the education type is the key to reducing abortions
Eileen_T said:
We covered this on the Life website under Sex Education and Abortion life.org.nz/abortionkeyissuessexeducation.htm

We have covered the topic fairly extensively and include findings from Dr David Paton of Nottingham University Business School (NUBS), and Dutch sociologist Joost van Loon who is a Reader in Social Theory and Director of the Centre for Research in Culture and Communication at Nottingham Trent University, and has written a paper called Deconstructing the Dutch Utopia. In it he argues low teenage pregnancy figures is not due to high-quality, explicit and early sex education.
Click to expand...
 
Linnyo said:
This has definately been the case in Scotland. This tells me that the schools are teaching it wrongly. Having spoken to young people about the sex education they have recieved, they have said that the teaching legitimizes sex before marraige. At 12 years old, they are being told sex is great - don’t get caught! They are then being shown how to use condoms at school. This education is meant to reduce teenage pregnancies and it has done the opposite. Politicians say more sex ed is the answer.
Click to expand...
And they are wrong. Check out the Catholic Educators Network on important works done recently on what birth control and permissiveness did in, I mean, to, the U. S. The latest article relies on a Nobel lauriate in economics who has studied these forces: he is neither Catholic nor conservative, but his conclusions will not surprise either Catholics or conservatives.
 
mapleoak said:
As long as we are not referring to people with signs and billboards as an ‘organization usurping parents rights to how and when they teach their children about sex’,
Click to expand...
I would hazard a guess that if a gay rights organization were out with signs and billboards containing graphic images of men or women engaging in homosexual intercourse, or if Playboy or Hustler was out with signs and billboards containing graphic images of men and women engaging in heterosexual intercourse, or if there were large billboards and signs with graphic images depicting the activities at a BDSM club or in an XXX movie or showing a graphic menage a trois session of intercourse, etc, in places where children could see them that many folks would likely consider that these “people with signs and billboards” were indeed deciding how and when the children who saw them learned about that aspect of sex.🤷
 
mapleoak said:
As long as we are not referring to people with signs and billboards as an ‘organization usurping parents rights to how and when they teach their children about sex’, or some such nonsense, I completely agree with this statement.
Click to expand...
I’m confused by this statement. Are you now for kindergarten teachers bringing up subjects in kindergarten that may spark discussion at home? (Like appropriate and inappropriate body touching, etc.) Because (and I may be confusing you w/ someone else) I was under the impression that you were against the politicians who are for sex ed in kindergarten.

If this passes, and your child is taught that (for example) touching themselves is okay so long as it’s in private, you would have no problem w/ that? I understand you don’t agree w/ the premise, but it would offer you a wonderful opportunity to discuss with your kindergartener how you feel about masterbation.

I guess I’m confused where you stand on exposing children to the “facts of life” whether good or bad “facts”. (Facts, meaning abortion, masterbation, etc.) On one thread you say it’s okay for organizations to post signs for children to see that their parents deem inappropriate, yet on the other (I think I remember) y ou say you don’t want sex ed in kindergarten. Why not? Those in favor of kindy sex ed believe they are doing it for a better cause (educating children whose parents do not do so to help them recognize inappropriate touching to help ward off sexual abuse) just like the pro-lifers posting graphics signs believe in their cause.

What is your stance, exactly? (And if I have you confused w/ someone else I apologize. As I mentioned yesterday, I’m feeling under the weather, and my head is VERY cloudy! 🙂 )
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top