All Comments on 'Abstinence vs. Sex Education'

You are absolutely correct in everything you said and I applaud you for it. One of the chapters in my book that I am currently writing (about things I hate) talks about this very subject and we came to the same conclusions. Politicians and religious leaders would prefer that sex not be taught at all in the schools, but this is not one of those times where "ignorance is bliss." Teenagers are going to experiment with sex just as they do with drinking alcohol and smoking pot--it's a rite of passage that we all went through when we are teenagers. At least they should have the correct information available so that they can make mature decisions for themselves based on facts and not on religious rhetoric. The same goes for Evolution VS Intelligent Design, but that's for another time...

You did a great job with this article, especially with a topic that's such a hot debate. As a parent of two boys ages 13 and 9 I have learned whether I like it or not sex is a very big topic among kids today, inbetween movies, video games and music, kids have learned more about the subject than we ever did at their age, well I know mine do. I've worked in the medical field long enough know the statistics with STD's and unwanted pregnancies with teenagers and young adults and to be honest the result scare the daylights out of me. Our kids need to worry about STD's that were almost unheard of when we were their age but now have made a come back. I am not sure what school districts are like but where I am at my oldest went through his first sex education course in the 6th grade then had another more indepth one again in the 7th grade. Parents had to sign a permission slip for their child to attend the class. I had my son attend both years, did it accomplish anything I dont know, but I hope he paid enough attention to learn something, since my oldest refuses to discuss sex with MOM I didn't get alot out of him regarding the class. He has also sat down with his uncle and had a long talk as well, I am blessed there too because their father died 5 years ago and my brother in law is close enough with my boys that I know they will go to him and ask questions knowing that they will be answered as honestly as possible. I've learned that there is some things that boys will not discuss with mom and sex is at the top of the list.

I've listed the sex education my son's have received now I will tell you what I truly hope they will do WAIT till they are older, way older. Abstinence is a wonderful thing and I pray my boys do it but I also have to look at reality and reality is most kids have experimented sexually one way or another. Regardless of what I want the choice is theirs to make, I have no control over it so knowing what I do, I did what I thought was best if they are not going to wait than I want them to be educated on how to make it as safe as possible. They need to be aware of the different STD's and how to prevent them as well as unwanted pregnancies, yes I have taught my boys that birth control is just as much their responsibility as the girls. At least I know that they understand and comprehend with all that is at risk, as well as prevention, if they decide not to wait.

As parents we can teach our children our believes and hope the follow but reality is the choice is theirs, whether we like it or not. To me our kids are better off knowing all of it regardless if abstinence is our belief, if we trust them enough the knowing wont hurt what we have spent years teaching them, it's the not knowing that can hurt them.

What I find interesting is that the U.S. is the only Westernized nation that teaches predominantly abstinence only sex-education, yet it has the highest teen pregnancy rate among Westernized nations. Teens are going to have sex whether we want them to or not; whether we think they are ready or not. Comprehensive sexuality education demystifies sex, provides factual information about how teens can protect themselves IF and WHEN they choose to become sexually active, and discusses activities that are alternatives to intercourse...as well as promoting absinence as the only 100% effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

Maybe it is time for parents and legislators to wake up and smell the 21st century reality...

You cited 6th grade with parental permission, if you are going to be real world, since we are already have 5th and 6th grade pregnancies (ignoring other consequences)when do we start? A recent case in Utah, cited felony charges against 11 year old boy and 12 year old girl (girl pregnant), since Utah law does not recognize that a child can legally consent so felony rape. A 14 and 15 year old couple would have a misdemeanor charge, protected by the age difference re adult and 15 year old.

You have researched, what does the research say? If they are already pregnant during their first Sex Ed class, it is a little late.

Good article, I pretty much agree with the majority of points.

Personally, my parents did really well - I was taught the basics of sex ed by the time I was 5, and I knew the majority of it by my teens. I was taught it in such a way that it was just something I'd always known, rather than being a forbidden subject. Did I then go out and experiment sexually at the age of 7? Nope, in fact I abstained from pretty much all sexual activity until my late teens. I can see the argument that teaching this stuff to young teens filled with hormones might encourage experimentation to some extent, but the answer to that is to teach younger, not older.

There were a couple of things that I thought were spurious correlations btw, for example the statement that abstainance pledgers were less likely to use contraception and were less likely to divorce. I think both of these points actually have more of a bearing on the fact that the majority of abstainance pledgers will be from conservative religious backgrounds where contraception and divorce may both be perceived as very wrong (at least in comparison with a more liberal background).

Remember, no problem has ever been solved through ignorance.

If I was at a school that preached abstinence I would probably try my hardest to avoid becoming like the teachers.

My largest problem with areas that are not open about sex is that they often teach people to believe that anything other than heterosexuality is wrong. I could go into a discussion about religion here but I'm tired so I'll shorten it to a summary

Sex education allows pupils to make their own choices. And isn't the freedom to choose what humanity covets most.

I totally agree with your conclusion about abstinence-only sex ed. However, (and I know this isn't YOUR fault) so called 'comprehensive sex ed' doesn't do very well teaching children or young adults what they need to know about sexuality. A nephew of mine is in high school, is 17 years old and still thought that 'pulling out' would prevent conception. Unfortunately, after his girlfriend had a pregnancy scare around Christmas, he was sat down by my sister and given a few facts that were obviously left out of the curriculum. *sigh* And this is a child who'd been having talks about sex since he was about 10. Pity those poor kids who are just told that they shouldn't even think about 'that sort of thing' until marriage. Even with supportive, open-minded parents or at least an attempt at school based sex ed., there's a disconnect.

I totally agree with every thing you have written, and very diplomatically written at that. My Bisexual daughter often is criticised in her sex-ed classes for bringing up some of the topics you have spoken about. Its a lovely change to read something as well thought out and open minded as this in contest to the narrow-minded prejudice that is so common today.

A wonderfully written article that really gives the facts. Being in the field myself and working somewhere that provides "medically accurate comprehensive sex education" to Middle and High School students (and grade school when asked) I couldn't agree more that we need more, not less. Having been in a possition to see the results of both sides of the argument, it only makes sense to give our kids all the information that they need to make the decision because in the end, they will do exactly what teenagers have been doing forever. Absinence only teaching doesn't stop sex and comprehensive education doesn't encourage it. Bravo

When I had to take sex ed 5 years ago in high school, they did an abstinence only one and still do. In my sisters 7th grade class full of 12 year olds at least 6 got pregnant. They also told my sister that condoms fail more than 20 percent of the time and she had to sign a pledge to pass the class or get an "F".

A bibliography would definitely help to substantiate some of your claims.

If you looked at the different cross cutural studies, you would have seen that not only does comprehensive edcucation work, it works well. IE. in 1986, in Germany, Austria and the Neitherlands, they has as part of Gynamun... their version of high school... a study on human sexuality. Where they would explain any and everything about sexuality, good and bad. This included homo-sexuality, Bi-sexuality, and Poly-sexuality. At the end of four years of study, these three countries were in the top five for the least amout of sexualy transmitted disease, teen pregnancy, and AIDS. It also takes out the rebellion factor from the equation. It's not about permissivenes, but that you can only make an informed decision IF you have the information and knowledge avalible to you to make the right choice.

My only comment here is, as one of the parents of three teenage girls, 18, 16, and 15, I have no love at all for abstinence-only sex education. I went the other way. I give them all the info they want, and sometimes more than they ask for.

It has worked wonderfully. No overly revealing clothing, no promiscuity, and actually, so far, no more than some make-out level experimentation. The people who say that talking about contraception and all the facts makes kids more likely to have sex...are completely wrong. Keep in mind all this has happened (or should I say *hasn't* happened?) in an environment in which they've been told that if they decide they need to be on the pill, or need condoms, or both, it will be arranged without question.

Of course, it isn't all about the sex education in and of itself, either. It's the whole attitude of preparing kids to make decisions about what they experience, rather than telling them what they should think every time.

It's easy to paint inadequate abstinence sex Ed as insufficient. Comprehensive sex Ed is also full of bias, and promotes lies about the effectiveness of condoms. Here is the bottom line: There is no positive impact to one's life, male or female from casual sex, and it dramatically increases life's problems. I see this every day. So teach what you want, but that is the real data.

I teach in a district with both high poverty and high teen pregnancy. I do really like this essay; although, I think your argument would have been a lot stronger if you'd juxtaposed the abstinence only programs in the US to the programs used in other countries such as Germany, England and Italy.

I still got pregnant while using birth control. (Condoms are effective but not absolute.) But, I knew my choices and what the consequences were when I started having sex. I waited until I felt ready to handle them when my now-husband/then boyfriend decided to start. It wasn't because of the program at my high school or junior high. It was because my parents, particularly my daddy, was willing to talk about sex honestly and show me research. (Actual research, not porn like some kids got. LOL) He showed me what to watch for and how to compare.

Now, I have students as well as my son who ask about sex. I have to be careful because of the legalities surrounding it, but students have been known to show up when I am shopping outside of school hours or even stay after school and ask questions. I've been surprised at some of the misconceptions that have come about because of the trusted people closing their mouths and not being willing to teach what needs to be taught. Yes, abstinence is preferred, but I don't think that is happening in this culture.

If you want your child to have a solid comprehensive sex education class based on values, the UCC and Unitarians have put together a complete curriculum. The sweet spot for this in most kids is about 7th or 8th grade. Most churches allow outsiders to attend the classes, but will make the parents look over the curriculum. It will likely cost money and the classes will be over several months and many hours long. My daughters who are now in college attended. They have had opportunities to be sexually active but have chosen not to. They know that they can talk to their parents about it when they decide to. When in high school they often would be asked by the teachers of the "sex ed" classes to answer questions that the teacher didn't know the answer to. The classes cover a pretty full range of sexual topics, but also put in in the context of why and making sure that you are making your choices. I don't know how a public school could really offer true comprehensive sex ed, but some churches do, and every child who I know has taken them remarks years later how helpful they were. My wife took the classes 35 years ago and thought it was important that our children did as well.

I started out my teen life in the late sixties, just after the start of the liberation of women due to the introduction of the pill. If you think that there are problems now, you should have been around back then! There was no sex education per se. So we found things out by trial and error. How is that really different from today? It isn't. But I was fortunate to be involved in my late teens in a comprehensive sex education program that really opened my eyes, especially after graduating from a Catholic high school where abstinence only was the only approach offered.

After years of life, I have come to realize three things:

1. Education is better. It gives people choices.

2. Those who chose not to make use of the education they receive are doomed to failure and where sex is involved that will mean unwanted pregnancy or STDs.

3. Organized religion is all about control. Sorry that my personal view will upset some, but I have come lately to this view just by watching and listening. If organized religions are preaching abstinence only, it is because they want control over their members. Lets face it, religion wants unconditional acceptance of the 'holy' views of the particular religion. That includes telling people that sex is for procreation and not for recreation. But when people find that sex is good, they suddenly begin to question the 'holy' views of their religion. So how does religion fight back? Abstinence. Enforced by religious proclamation against breaking abstinence only. Telling people that sex is bad, that god is good, and that only their specific religion can intercede between god and the masses.

This point is really of interest for me. You only have to go back as far as the 50's to see that abstinence did not work. Nor does it work today. But if you are a history buff, then you know that through 10,000 yrs of human history, there are an incredible amount of stories of families in the toils of rebellious children who have decided against their parents, and their religion because of love and sex. Sex is a powerful human experience, especially when love is tied to it.

It is saddening to me that those who estole the virtues of abstinence only, have selectively chosen to forget even the most immediate past never mind the long history of human stories of turmoil, oppression, and disobedience around love and sex. The numbers of teenage pregnancies are actually down now adays compared to that ot the 50's. The difference is that back then we hid teenage pregnancy. The introduction of the pill helped reduce that number significantly, but it also opened the doors to promiscuous habits and STDs. The reason for that was most people did not know their options and did not use them. It wasn't until later in the 60s that education become readiy available, and wans't until the mid-70s that teenagers were allowed to by condoms. Then the numbers of teenage pregnancy dropped even further.

Abstinence doesn't work, because people are naturally curious, especially youth. Eventually they will try sex, and come to like it. Then question their particular religion. So forcing abstinence only really will come back to bite those who push it where it hurts. You can only ignore the truths of reality until the rack you step on hits you in the face.

The statistics over the past decades simply do not support abstinence only. Anyone who says otherwise is pushing his/her own agenda.

While I'm a scientific sort and so believe in education as a risk mitigator, I suspect that you'll never convince the religious right to change unless you mount the religious argument that ignorance of risk is risking God's children's health, and use the hipocrasy argument - few parents would have never have had lustful thoughts or acted on it at some point.

I'd consign the "abstain" lectures to optional comparative religion classes and promote sexual knowledge as a part of health and society studies and do it at a variety of ages with more explicit info later, guided by scientific advice based on surveys of what kids are doing.

This is largely how programs work in Australia.

Alternatively, provide fun and exciting internet based material and periodic campaigns - kids will find out what they seek.

Another approach that might work is to sue the parents, schools and churches where pregnant teens go if they've only taught abstinence or where they mis-represent the health benefits of condoms etc.

Same for kids who are persecuted by homophobic schoolmates, or who catch STIs.

Not providing safety information in hazard situations where we can foresee potential harm is an abdication of duty of care.

Ps would love references.

I know I was taught, "Don't do it, but if you do here's how." I was abstinent until 24 but only due to a lack of available, willing partners not because of what level of Christian commitment I had at the time--even the belief I was sinning would not have stopped me if presented with a willing woman of legal age, reality just did not give me one until I was 24. Then I grabbed the opportunity with both hands. I talked with many Christian boys, young men, girls, and young women--I am nowhere near unique, but most started sooner, many in ill-advised marriages at 18. What the conservative churches are teaching is just wrong. Sure, teach abstinence until marriage is God's ideal, but teach facts, not lies about contraception, STD's, abortion, etc.