In todays society more and more teens are becoming sexually active, whether we want them to or not. In fact, according to Emma Elliott’s article “Abstinence Sex Education Reduces Teen Sexual Activity”, 40 percent of sexually active teens become pregnant and more than 8,000 teens become infected with a sexually transmitted disease every day. We can not prevent teens from having sexual intercourse, but we can help provide them with more options and choices to help protect their futures. Current sex education programs focus on teaching abstinence only, which leaves students without the knowledge on how to protect themselves if the situation to have sexual intercourse ever appeared. Changing the program is the first step in helping teens and their futures. We can improve sex education by teaching students the different forms of contraceptives available, how sexually transmitted disease are spread, and the consequences that come along with choosing to become sexually active. Although abstinence is the most effective prevention of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, I believe that by changing sex education programs to teach teens all of the precautions before making that big decision, will dramatically improve statistics.
Arthur Caplan, the director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, said that he is “completely against abstinence-only sex ed programs for three reasons: there is no evidence at all that they work; common sense says they have no chance of working; and it is not clear that ethically they send the right message to young people.” I agree with him because of all of the evidence researchers show for teens who are sexually active, there is no evidence to show that abstinence-only classes work. In fact, Texas and Kansas evaluated their sex education classes and found that there was no change in the number of students pledging to remain abstinent until marriage, therefore, abstinent-only classes are not working. Next, teens will do what they believe is right for them so it is only common sense to teach them how to protect themselves against sexually transmitted diseases as well as an unwanted pregnancy. Educators who are teaching abstinence-only probably never followed that motto in their own lives, so it is hypocritical for them to try and enforce that life style upon another individual.
For years sex education programs have instilled abstinence upon teenagers, making them unaware of the different ways to protect themselves if and when they do decide to have sexual intercourse. This is what causes abstinence-only programs to be more harmful for teens than beneficial. Arthur Caplan says that “nearly half of the nation’s new cases of STDs each year occur among adolescents and young adults”. I believe that if we change the way sex educated programs are designed, then sexually transmitted diseases amongst teens will no longer post as a huge problem, like it currently does. In a more modernized sex education class, the instructor will teach the students about the many different forms of sexually transmitted diseases, how they are transmitted, and how the students can protect themselves against them. This will not only give the students the knowledge on how to keep sexually transmitted disease free, but they will also know what signs to look for when they do decide to become intimate with someone.
Most teens are also unaware about the different forms of contraceptives. Teenagers most likely only know of one form, which are condoms. Ninety-five percent of U.S. teenagers have taken a sex education class according to The Washington Times (Washington DC), however, only two-thirds were informed about birth-control methods. If sex education programs are not teaching our children how to protect themselves properly, not only against unwanted pregnancies but also against sexually transmitted diseases, then where are they supposed to learn it from? Only about 80 percent of girls and 70 percent of boys actually talk to their parents about at least one sex related topic says Washington Times (Washington DC). Where are the other 20 percent of girls and 30 percent of boys receiving their information from? In a newer program, I believe that students should be taught all of the different types of contraceptives. This will insure the safety of their health and future by giving them the knowledge on how to protect their bodies, if they do decide to have sexual intercourse. Improving sex education programs will also guarantee that all students are learning how to keep safe from a reliable resource.
Many teenagers today believe that “it won’t happen to them”, but it can. Forty percent of sexually active teens will, in due course, become pregnant before marriage says Emma Elliott. This is why it is imperative to teach our children about the consequences that come along with having sexual intercourse before they actually become active. Educators of the sex education programs need to start being realistic in the fact that teens will have sex. Today, “more than 70 percent of young women and 80 percent of young men approve of premarital sex” says Arthur Caplan. If teens believe that it is okay, then they will be more likely to have premarital sex. Showing students the consequences of sexual intercourse however, might help to change their minds when making that decision to become intimate with someone else. Some of these consequences include emotional attachment, judgement by their peers, and the most obvious ones; pregnancy, and sexually transmitted diseases.
Abstinence is the best option to teach our children when speaking to them about sex for the first time. It is the only one hundred percent effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. However, when it comes to teens, they will do what they ultimately believe is right for them. So it is also prominent to teach them about the steps to take in order to protect themselves in a different way just in case they do decide to have sex. This is why I believe that a change in the sex education program is needed.
Emma Elliot, when speaking in her article “Abstinence Sex Education Reduces Teen Sexual Activity”, makes a very strong point by saying: “while sexually active characters on television programs virtually never contract STDs, millions of real teenagers will this year”. Although she trying to strengthen her belief in teaching abstinent-only courses to teenagers, her point also went against her belief. If Emma Elliot is so concerned in the spread of sexually transmitted diseases amongst teens, then why would she not want to improve sex education classes to teach students how to protect themselves?
Emma Elliot also goes on in her article to say that “the vast majority of teenage pregnancies occur unintentionally and outside of marriage. Of those who carry their babies to term, only one-third will complete high school.” I feel like this statement also contradicts her argument. Elliot is completely aware of the statistics about teen pregnancy, however, she still does not believe that sex education programs should be expanded to cover contraceptives.
Obviously abstinent-only classes are no longer reaching through to teenagers, who are becoming sexually active more and more each day. Unfortunately, nothing has been done to change these programs to accommodate teens and their behaviors. Using abstinence-only as a form of a contraceptive is not one hundred percent bulletproof, for there are those mass majority of students who will “slip up” and have sex. This is why I firmly believe that sex education classes need to be improved to help secure and protect the futures of teenagers. Abstinence will still be the main component in these new programs, however, contraceptive use, sexually transmitted diseases, and the consequences that come along with becoming sexually active will also be a big portion of the class. When students do decide to become sexually active they will be fully acquainted on how to protect not only their bodies but their futures as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment