The Subjective Classroom
by Melissa Jordan
There are constantly power struggles in schools trying to discern how the curriculum should be taught and whether the present curriculum is biased. Unfortunately, these power struggles usually do not end quickly or for the better, and many students in the United States are receiving a biased education in an area of information that can be harmful when the facts are not clear. As schools look to Abstinence Only sex education, many teens are having trouble separating opinion from fact, and living a healthy and safe sex life.
Abstinence Only (AO), as opposed to Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE), teaches students that the only way to stay safe is to not have any sexual contact. The definition of sexual contact ranges from holding hands to having intercourse and oral sex (advocatesforyouth.org). While the only way to stay absolutely 100% safe is to refrain from intercourse, oral, and anal sex, AO does not properly inform students about types of birth control and how to use them: in 2002 one third of teens received no formal contraception education (guttmacher.org).
Many progressives point the finger at the federal government for giving more funding to AO education than to CSE. However, this is not the case when one considers that the federal government has no set equation to determine this funding, and the funding that is available, many states refuse (Huffstutter, latimes.com). Rather, local governments, school districts, and individual schools carry more of the burden determining what should and shouldn't be taught in sex education classes. Nine in ten sex education teachers believe students should be taught about contraception, but one in four are prohibited from doing so because of a local or school regulation (guttmacher.org). Further, the education code in some states, such as Texas, does not even require schools to offer any sex education class at all. It is also interesting to note that Texas has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the nation (statesman.com).
But does that mean Americans want AO education? A poll done by NPR, the Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard's Kennedy School of Government found that only 15% of Americans think that schools should teach AO education. However, 46% of Americans wanted "abstenance-plus" education, a curriculum combining the idea that abstenance is the best choice, but includes information about contraceptives and how to use and obtain them. The remaining 36% believe that teaching abstenance is not the most important, and believe sex education should teach students how to make wise and informed decisions about sex.
AO only exists so the "morally superior" can sleep better at night. Teaching students about contraception is not encouraging sex - just like teaching a child to call 911 in an emergency is not encouraging them to call 911 on a daily basis - but rather, it teaches how to make a serious decision, and how to comport oneself with responsibility after that decision has been made.
When all is said and done, students who know that they want to stay virgins will regardless if their school teaches AO or CSE. However, teaching AO becomes a problem with students who are unsure if they want to abstain from sex, or are already experimenting sexually. AO can also be a problem later in life for those students who did abstain - when they are married and find that they don't know how to protect themselves against unwanted pregnancies or STDs. AO sends anti-contraceptive messages and students who have been taught AO are less likely to use any contraceptives, including condoms. They are also less likely to get tested for STDs, according to a report by the Senior Staff Attorney of Sexuality and Family Rights, Julie F. Kay. With these students not using contraceptives, higher rates of STDs and pregnancies among teens are unavoidable. In the end, AO is unfair to teenagers, and prohibits some from staying healthy. This nation owes it to all of our hopes for a fruitful future to no longer depend on Abstinence Only.