2008 Woodie Awards
Let's talk about sex-in the classroom
By: Nicole Mortimer
Issue date: 4/24/08 Section: Opinion
|
As a report that came out a month ago details, one in four teenaged girls is infected with a STI. The study didn't include male infection rates because as of yet there are no tests for males. The main diseases studied were chlamydia, HPV and genital herpes. Among the infected teens, 10 percent had more than one disease.
Accompanying this rise in STIs is a rise in teen pregnancy. Abstinence-only sex education has accomplished exactly what it purports to be fighting against: raising the rates of teens with STIs and increasing the number of teen mothers.
That is frightening and alarming.
In countries with AIDS problems, the government doesn't fix it by advocating no sex but by advocating the use of condoms. Sweden has one of the lowest rates of teen births and STIs because of its extensive sex education programs.
Currently, the U.S. is spending $170 million on abstinence-only sex education in public schools across the country. It doesn't seem to be working that well, especially considering that for the first time in 14 years, the teen birthrate rose in 2006, according to the Center for Disease Control's National Center for Health Statistics. The rate of children born out of wedlock also rose.
Many teens aren't going to know what to do to protect themselves if they do not have sex education. I'm sure many of your parents, or your friends' parents, weren't exactly chomping at the bit to demonstrate how to use a condom or why, exactly, dental dams are important. For some, school may be the only place where they would be able to get reliable information on sex and reproductive health.
In a 2002 study, researchers found that teens between 15 and 19 years old who received sex education were 60 percent less likely to have been pregnant than those with no sex education or abstinence-only sex education.
Teens are going to have sex whether or not parents tell them not to. Abstinence-only sex education does not discourage youths from having sex. In fact, sex education helps delay the age at which teens start having sex: In a 2007 study of over 2,000 teens, the male study participants who'd received sex education were 71 percent less likely to have had sex before age 15 and the girls were 59 percent less likely to have had sex by the same age. In the same study, the males who received comprehensive sex education were more likely to use protection.
Texas has the highest percentage of repeat teen births and also uses abstinence-only sex education. From 1992 to 2002, the percentage of teen births dropped by 18 percent, but in California, which has comprehensive sex education, the percentage dropped by 40 percent.
In Orlando, Florida, it was reported on April 2 that teens there believe that drinking a cap of bleach and a shot of Mountain Dew will prevent pregnancy. This is reminiscent of the 1950s, when abstinence-only sex education or the complete lack of sex education contributed to the golden age of teenage pregnancy. In response, state lawmakers have proposed a bill to create a more comprehensive sex education policy, and it just passed its first vote in a committee.
It's a good first step for Florida, and hopefully this frightening trend will not continue nation-wide. Teens deserve to know how to protect themselves, whether or not they decide to have sex.