Abstinence Only?

I was very pleased to read a post from my colleague, Allison Murken, which addresses the issue of the lack of sexual education in Texas’ schools.  The post is titled “What Needs to Happen?”, and I found her personal statement very frank and relevant to the matter.  Interestingly enough, I have published a commentary about how sexual education is essential in our schools in order to avoid unplanned pregnancies.  Essentially, we both relate to the fact that the “abstinence only” program has failed, and the statistics are the evidence.

Two main points in Murken’s post made a deep impression of what people want to believe happens, and what actually happens.  The first point was that her school did not have a program to efficiently and sensibly teach children and teenagers about sexuality.  What happened was that a significant portion of the girls ended up getting pregnant and the solution for the problem was to expel them from the school.  This is a typical example of a hypocritical society that does not educate and guide, but expect people to behave within some boundaries.  Some people argue that sex education in schools is synonymous to giving the young permission to experiment with sex.  I see this point of view as very limited and naïve.  Education promotes knowledge and understanding. Education promotes reasoning and responsibility.  Once teenagers get informed, they have a chance to understand why it is better to wait until maturity to have sexual relations, and they can discern right from wrong.  When this information is not given to them, as mentioned in Murken’s commentary, what happens is that “the more we don’t talk to them about it, the more interested they are.”  This statement brings up the second point that is extremely important.  The forbidden is always more attractive than a teenager can handle.  They will, sooner or later, experiment with sex just because they cannot control their curiosity anymore.  Plus, the media is a terrible influence in terms of promoting sexuality.  If parents and schools do not teach the students about what sex really is, and what the consequences of it are; the TV shows will.  The problem is that the lessons from TV will most likely give them a twisted idea about sex, and it will not warn these inexperienced teenagers about the possible outcomes.

Murken also wrote that some schools are implementing the abstinence-plus program that will teach students about birth control and sexually transmitted diseases.  I believe this is a great step forward, but it is still lacking an objective, scientific, psychological, and emotional approach to sexuality.  The students should understand about their bodies, puberty, sensations, and desires too.  At this age, many teens are falling in love for the first time and are very vulnerable to a sexual encounter with their loved one; therefore, they should also know all about pregnancy and diseases.

In sum, sexual education is necessary to teach the young how to handle their thoughts, curiosities, and feelings.  Education is the only way a society has to deal with important life concerns.  When we preach abstinence only and nothing else, we are leaving the door open for teenagers to look out and seek their own learning.