
Spring used to be my favorite season. I loved the warm weather, the blooming flowers, the start of lacrosse season accompanied by the longer days. But after my first sex education class in the spring of my fourth grade, I learned to dread spring for the next five years. I still remember that day. The male PE teacher took the boys to a separate room while the female nurse came in and started talking to all the girls. There was a basket with folded paper that had topics written on them. One of the topics I still remember discussing was “bras.” For the next five years, my knowledge of sex education expanded. In middle school, boys and girls were separated with the exception of lunch and recess. In fifth and sixth grade, sex education was taught for a unit is science class. In fifth grade, I learned about the girls reproductive system. In sixth grade, it was the boys productive system. In seventh and eighth grade, sex education was a PE unit. I only had one more sex education class in high school during the fall of my ninth grade year as part of a unit in my health and wellness I class. We learned more about STIs, contraception, and birth control and less about how things work inside the body. It was more an emphasis on how to protect yourself during any type of sexual activity. The school was very involved with informing my parents. They always received an email over winter break informing them that the sex education unit would be starting that spring.

Today, what high schoolers are being taught in their sex education courses is a growing controversy among parents, students and educators. However, not informing young adolescents on an adequate amount of sex related information can only hurt the future of their lives when confronted with the situation of sex, therefore how the sex education curriculum should be taught in schools needs to be revisited by state officials. It is important to give young people knowledge and information on sex education so they can make informed decisions about how to protect themselves and their bodies.

What are students actually being taught in their sex education classes? There are two different ways to teach sex education in school: abstinence-only and abstinence-plus. The main message of an abstinence-only education, according to Stanger-Hall and Hall, is to “delay sexual activity until marriage.” In addition, many abstinence-only programs having federal funding and under those regulations it prohibits the addition of “information about contraception or safer-sex practices” (Stanger-Hall & Hall). An abstinence-plus or comprehensive sex education includes “medically accurate information on contraception and protection from HIV/STDs (Stanger-Hall & Hall). From 2006-2008, it was found that many teens between the ages of 15 and 19 have received a formal education on STIs, HIV and abstinence (Guttmacher Institute). It also revealed that approximately one-third of students had received no education about contraception at all. Both middle and high schools advocate more intensely that remaining abstinent until marriage is the best way to avoid unwanted pregnancy, STIs and HIV/AIDS. High schools, more so than middle schools, teach about methods of contraception, but still less often than abstinence. However, how sex education is taught in public schools is up to the state government, not the federal government. In a study conducted by Stanger-Hall and Hall, they ranked each state’s abstinence education on a scale from 0 to 3; “from least to most emphasis on abstinence: no provision, abstinence covered, abstinence promoted, abstinence stressed.” In their results, they discovered that “21 states stress abstinence-only education (level 3), 7 states emphasized abstinence education (level 2), 11 states covered abstinence in the context of comprehensive sex education (level 1), and 9 states did not mention abstinence (level 0).” In further research done by the Guttmacher Institute, it reported that the majority of public and private high schools were teaching that abstinence is the “most effective method to avoid pregnancy, HIV and other STDs” while 67% of high schools taught about the risks and consequences of teen pregnancy and 81% discussed the risks attributed to having a plethora of sex partners. It also reported that 65% of high schools taught about condoms and even 39% were teaching proper condom usage. In the US overall, the most common teaching is abstinence-only education. With the majority of students solely learning about abstinence, students, particularly those in high school, are being sent out into a sex obsessed world where they are uneducated about how to protect themselves and their bodies from pregnancy and STIs. The root of the problem is that different states’ standards on sex education widely vary and not every student is receiving the same sex education in public school. However, how much should students be taught?

What information should be given to students in sex education classes has remained a controversial problem for the United States. Lines dividing the views on sex education appears among political groups and states. One of the main fuels for this debate over sex education are the “soaring rates of sexually transmitted diseases” (Masland). The abstinence-only view is to wait until marriage while the opposing debate is a comprehensive sex education that includes “information about sexually transmitted diseases, contraception and abstinence” (Masland). A major flaw in the way sex education is taught is that there are no guidelines as to what should be covered in sex education classes. As of 2015, 32 states do not require schools to teach sex education, while 18 states plus the District of Columbia do require schools to teach sex education. The problem with no universal law is that students in Louisiana may “learn about HIV/AIDS, but not about any other STDs or how to prevent pregnancy” while students in Washington will “receive information on everything from birth control pills to homosexuality” (Masland). The concern is that the more information teenagers are given about sex, the more likely they are to engage in sexuality activity. The World Health Organization conducted a study that examined 35 different sex education programs all over the world and concluded that “there is no evidence that comprehensive programs encourage sexual activity” (Masland). That study also drew conclusions that “abstinence-only programs are less effective than comprehensive classes” (Masland). Guttmacher Institute conducted a study with similar results finding that a comprehensive sex education helped “young people both to withstand the pressures to have sex too soon” and learn about the type of relationship they should have with their partner when they do become sexually active. Furthermore, a comprehensive sex education lead to delays or a reduction in sexually activity and number of partners or an “increased use of condoms or other contraceptives” (Guttmacher Institute). It was also reported that a 2007 study “found that federally-funded abstinence-only programs have no beneficial impact on young people’s sexual behavior” and while there is no evidence proving that federally-funded abstinence-only-until-marriage education is effective, a randomized controlled study “found that abstinence-only education programs that are specifically tailored to the local community and do not criticize contraceptives nor advocate abstinence until marriage can be effective” in teenagers delaying their starting age at which they have sex (Guttmacher Institute). Abstinence-only education does more harm than good, despite its intentions to remain pure and celibate. Students are uninformed about information that can affect their short term or long term health, such as STIs and pregnancy and are completely discouraged from having sex. There is a misconception that abstinence-plus education encourages students to have sex: not true. It is simply to inform students about what can happen if they chose to engage in sexual activity.

Another issue of controversy is that the United States “ranks first among developed nations in rates of teenage pregnancy” (Stanger-Hall & Hall). Stanger-Hall and Hall present data “that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.” Sociologists Peter Bearman and Hannah Brückner, of Columbia University and Yale, have determined that “communities with high rates of pledging have high rates of S.T.D.s” and that “if too many teens pledge, the effort [to stay abstinent until marriage] collapses.” The effort collapses because once the pledgers group reaches over 30%, they no longer feel special once proclaiming to be celibate becomes the norm. 

In addition to different states supporting different types of education, political differences between states aide students receiving the same kind of sex education. Naomi Cahn and June Carbone, of George Washington University and University of Missouri at Kansas City, have identified that blue states tend to have “lower teen birth rates, higher use of abortion, and lower percentages of teen births within marriage.” Whereas, red states typically start families earlier because “they are more inclined to deal with an unplanned pregnancy by marrying rather than by seeking an abortion” because it goes against their religious views. On the other hand, having sex before marriage goes against Christian religious views as well but, red states would rather someone have one wrong (sex before marriage) and one right (getting married and keeping the baby) more than having someone have two wrongs (sex before marriage and an abortion). These controversies spill over into parents views on sex education.

What do parents think their child should be taught in sex education? The answer is fairly consistent throughout the United States. In a study done in Harris County, Texas, “1,201 parents of school-aged children” were assessed on “their views of sex education programming in schools” (Tortolero). This included if parents were in favor of teaching sex education in school, at what grade, what should be taught content wise and “who should be making decisions regarding teaching sex education” (Tortolero). The study resulted in showing that 93% of parents supported school-based sex education, while only 7% of parents think sex education should not be taught in schools. It also showed that two-thirds of parents think “sex education should include information about both abstinence and condoms and contraception” while almost one-third thought “sex education should include information on abstinence-only” and 8% of parents thought that sex education should not be taught in schools. Moreover, 75% of parents in this study endorsed the idea “that schools should be doing more to help prevent teen pregnancy and STIs” (Tortolero). Tortolero discusses how “the majority of parents support an abstinence message that includes medically accurate instruction on condoms and contraception.” Another study done by McKee focuses on Mississippi, in partly because of it being “identified as politically conservative.” The study consisted of 3,600 parents that have children who attend Mississippi public schools. McKee’s results show that more than 90% of parents were in favor of age-appropriate sex related education (SRE) and discussing transmission, prevention and how to get test for HIV/STIs during SRE. More than 80% supported the discussion on “where to obtain birth control” and more than 70% supported the demonstration on how to correctly use a condom during SRE (McKee). Both of the these studies are consistent with each other and others done across the country that assess the attitudes of parents “towards school-based sex education” (McKee). Both studies reveal that the majority of parents would like for their children to be appropriately informed on information relating to sex education. Parents would like children to be taught about both abstinence and pregnancy and contraceptives. Both studies support that the minority of parents would not like sex education to be taught in schools. Instead they would like it to be taught at home so they can instill their own values in their children. Despite the differing political views, most parents are on the same page when it comes to their kid’s sex education. If this is the case, that parents want their children to be informed, why are states now following up on sex education in schools if this is the popular notion towards sex education? This is because the political voices overrun the parents views. 

The major problem regarding sex education in schools today is what should be taught, when and by whom. If the United States public school system were truly following the principle of ‘separation of church and state’ then sex education would not be a highly debated issue because of the laws that are set in place. If children and adolescents choose to attend worship services of any kind, then that particular religious sanctuary can emphasis the importance of abstinence, if that is what that religion believes in. In particular, the church is there to stress the importance of abstaining from sexually activity in order for one to be considered a good Christian. The public school system is supposed to be there inform and educate, not be the center of a political debate. In order to maximize the knowledge given to students, there needs to be action taken on by the federal government. Funding needs to be shifted from abstinence-only education to abstinence-plus education to reflect the attitudes of parents and children. There needs to be common ground that is covered in abstinence-plus education that is medically accurate such as the male and female productive systems, the stages of puberty, information on abstinence as well as information on STIs, HIV/AIDS, and the effects of pregnancy and the different ways to avoid pregnancy through contraception. Because sex education is left up to the states there is a “big gap” in students education about sex (Quinn). It should be forewarned to students that pregnancy is not how it appears on MTV reality shows, such as 16 and Pregnant and Teen Mom. The media has glamorized teen pregnancy throughout the years through movies, like Juno, and TV shows, like Secret Life of the American Teenager. 

When was the last time you were asked to find the area of a triangle, aside from being in school? You probably cannot recall. High school does not prepare a student with a lot of information on how to succeed in the real world. Their sex education knowledge is something that they can carry with them into college and the real world. Because of its importance, teachers should specialize in this area, such as how a mathematics teacher specializes in mathematics. The CDC has a list of “recommendations for educating kids about sex” and “less than half of U.S. high schools and only one-fifth of middle schools” are meeting their criteria (Quinn). Under the CDC recommendations, there are 16 benchmarks under four subject areas: “HIV prevention, STD prevention, pregnancy prevention and information on sexuality” (Quinn).  The CDC’s main goal, according to Jesseca Boyer, the vice president of policy at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S. is that “’it should be framed around how you can live a healthy sexual life’” (Quinn). The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is in favor of a comprehensive sex education and argues that a CSE’s objective is to help young people “develop the knowledge and skills to make conscious, healthy, and responsible choices about relationships and sexuality” throughout their lifetime, which is why comprehensive sex education standards need to be set in place and followed. (UNESCO). 
