Abstinence Only

Growing up sex education classes consisted of the teacher standing up in front of the room reminding us that sex was bad and it was not good until you were married. However, today this method of teaching seems quite foolish as it is obvious that children younger and younger are having sex, the result sometimes being children born to people who are still children themselves. “The abstinence-only campaign has always been driven more by ideology than by sound public health policy” (NYT) the program’s strict guidelines prohibit any promotion of “contraceptive use and require teaching that sex outside marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects” (NYT). A report done on four communities where abstinence instruction was present revealed that it made no difference that these schools were taught abstinence-only instruction, students were just as likely to become sexually active at the same age as those who had not. Those who support the abstinence-only program believe that the recent decline in teenage pregnancy is due to the success of the program. However, a recent study by Columbia University and the Guttmacher Institute, “attributed 86 percent of the decline to greater an more effective use of contraceptives- and only 14 percent to teenagers’ deciding to wait longer to start having sex” (NYT).

This op-ed piece brings up an issue that is not just applicable in this case. Organizations, groups, associations, etc are constantly trying to take credit or twist something to better suit them when it really doesn’t. In this case the abstinence-only program wants to believe or take credit for the sharp decline in teenage pregnancy. Though like stated it was not this program that deserves the credit but the fact that teenagers are being proactive in their decisions and using contraceptives. So if we know that these young adults are not oblivious to sex, they know what it is and most likely are “doing it”, how come adults are so unwilling to let go of their conservative concepts to further aide in preventing teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases? If a child comes home pregnant is it her fault or is it the fault of those who refused to educate her on different methods of protection? Once again looking back to Garfinkel and his structural and individual approach, which is right and which is wrong? I am going to take the middle of the road approach and argue that it is the individual’s fault that did not support the structure of genuine sexual education. If teens were to understand that it is a smart decision to wait until you are older to have sex however if you are going to have sex there are certain precautions that can be taken to prevent pregnancy. There is always that argument that when you tell kids not to do something they just want to do it more. Teaching teens how to take care of themselves is not condoning premarital sex it is merely helping them establish a foundation to fall back on if need be.

Bibliography-

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/28/opinion/28sat1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin