Oseye Boyd, writing for the Muncie Star Press, has an article about sex education. The article cites polling data suggesting that the public would generally like kids to receive accurate information about birth control and preventing STDs while quoting school officials who believe the public prefers abstinence only education.
Regardless of what the study indicates, Liberty-Perry Community School Board President Keith Davis says the board’s decision to teach abstinence-only education is what his constituents want.
“I can assure you if we started teaching our kids the proper way to use birth control, we would hear from our community — I’m sure,” Davis said.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the loudest part of his constituency would freak out over the notion of teaching students about condoms and the like. The available evidence suggests “abstinence-only” sex education results in more pregnancies and STDs than medically accurate sex education. The fact is, we are doing ourselves and our children a disservice by being squeamish about talking about sex. I’m sure I’ll have to overcome some discomfort with the topic when it’s time for me to talk to my own kids. But it’s my job to make sure my kids have the best possible chances in life, and knowing how sex works and how to minimize the unwanted consequences are important bits of information. Having a child as a teen certainly has a way of limiting one’s options.
The issue of teaching reproduction and any points beyond abstaining is and will likely stay a major topic. While a private school can adopt a policy that becomes one of its major emphasis, public schools are caught in a battle ground situation. That is, local school boards set the policy on what can and can not be taught. This is an issue that becomes an election issue in some communities (single issue voting is not uncommon.) The simple answer that it is up to parents and churches to teach morality simply fails too frequently when culture and hormones are taken into consideration. Going further if bring in the abortion issue as a legal matter then the knowledge on preventing pregnance goes beyond a morality issue. That is, if abortion choice does not exist then it would seem wise to teach avoidance of pregnance by some means other than abstaining. Depending on abstaining has shown a major failure rate.
WRT teen pregnancies, I am unfortunately unsure that any form of sex ed will help. It is simply not the case that kids are having kids because they don’t understand how you get pregnant, or even because they haven’t heard of contraception.
I think the only way to really reduce teen pregnancy is to have a western-european style sex-friendly sex ed. I.e., as a teenager, we know you’re going to have sex, so here are some non-intercourse techniques, and here are some free condoms; you can get plenty more here…and if you would like to be on the pill, just go here.
Unfortunately, I think that’s never going to fly in schools.
The second, perhaps more important, goal of sex ed is explaining about STDs. This – and not in preventing teen pregnancies – is where abstinence ed really falls short, since even if kids are willing to risk getting pregnant (and unfortunately, there are a large number of semi-planned teen pregnancies), they shouldn’t risk getting herpes, etc.
Re: European style sex ed. The most common source for good advice on sex for teenagers in Germany is Bravo magazine, which is kind of a teen people with a sophisticated sex advice section.
You can find the online version of the magazine at http://www.bravo.de; if you click on the “Dr. Sommer” link in the upper left you will be taken to the sex advice page. Which you could then run through google translate…
Here is the link to the actual sex advice page:
http://www.bravo.de/online/render.php?render=000009
Warning: NSFW!
Actually, I’m not sure that a magazine like that could be sold in Indiana; it might constitute materials harmful to minors.
Aside from the other problems with elementary and secondary education delivered by govt entities with tremendous monopoly power, especially over the lower income classes…
Here we have the di…err, tri-lemma available to us: tyranny of the majority, tyranny of the minority, and in any case, the tyranny of the monopoly.
I understand why Statists want to jam their preferred vision down the throats of others. Why do so many cooperate with them?
My mistake is probably assuming that, with respect to sex education, the primary goal is to raise a child who knows how the plumbing works, knows how to avoid pregnancy even if sexual activity is occurring, and knows how to avoid STDs if sexual activity is occurring.
Doubtless there are parents for whom such goals take a back seat to ensuring that their children view sexuality in the way preferred by the parents. Just to take an extreme example, I’d be very dismayed if the schools were telling my kids that sex was a dirty, shameful thing.
Doug,
Even if one agrees with the substance of what you’ve laid out, there’s still the when, the how (method), and the how (subjective values flavoring the tone in which its delivered).
What would be appropriate, in my mind, would differ with context– between schools and even within classrooms. Beyond that, what’s appropriate in my mind (or yours) about these matters should not be the law of the land, yes?
Both the context and the subjectivity all of us have with a (very) sensitive topic…brings me back to the point about the “tyranny of the monopoly”.
Aside from Statists– and in the name of education, information, choice, tolerance, freedom, and so on– why should we go along with a monopoly?
So, are you content to keep the monopoly and endure the eternal fights over control of that monopoly? On what basis?