You are on page 1of 5

Deanna C.

Pettway
Biology Paper
Introduction
Sex education is very vital to youth as they begin to sexually mature. Effective sexual
health information will help youth to avoid teen pregnancy and STIs. Adolescence has the right
to be informed about contraception and condoms. Abstinence-only programs teach their students
to avoid having sex until marriage but do not provide this information which would be important
if a student decides to have sex before marriage. In the article The Failure of Abstinence-Only
Education: Minors Have a Right to Honest Talk about Sex, Hazel Glenn Beh and Milton
Diamond express the ineffectiveness of abstinence-only education. According to the article,
Abstinence-only programs might work by Rob Stein, abstinence-only education delays the
initiation of sex and protects against teen pregnancy and the risk of STIs, however this is false
and the article is not definite. In this paper, the problem of teen pregnancy and STIs in relation to
sex education will be discussed, followed by a synopsis of the article Abstinence-only programs
might work by Rob Stein and then how abstinence only education provides false and misleading
sexual health information and how it is a waste of money to provide federal funds for a program
that is not proven to work.
Summary of Problem
A huge issue within the young population is teenage pregnancy and STIs. As a result, the
federal government funds sexual education programs in order the risk of pregnancy in
adolescence and STIs. The U.S. has the highest teen birth rate and one of the highest rates of
sexually transmitted infections. There are multiple ways to teach sex education and some forms,

abstinence-only programs in particular, dont prove to be effective. According to a poll by


National Public Radio, more than 75% of Americans believe that it is appropriate to provide
young people with a broad curriculum that includes reliable information regarding contraception
and protection from sexually transmitted infections. However, abstinence-only programs do not
provide this information leaving risk as youth to contract a STI or become pregnant at a young
age if and when they do decide to have sex before marriage. There are many aspects of
abstinence only education that shows that it is ineffective and should be terminated. Abstinenceonly education provides false and misleading sexual health information and it is a waste of
money to provide federal funds for a program that is not proven to work.
Summary of Article Being Critiqued
In the article Abstinence-only programs might work, study says, Stein states that
abstinence-only education can persuade a significant portion of children to delay sexual activity
and protect young people against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. This
article is based on a landmark study published in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent
Medicine, conducted on students who attended abstinence-focused program. Critics argue that
the curriculum that was tested does not represent most abstinence-only programs and that the
sessions encouraged youth to delay sex until they were ready, not necessarily until they were
married. But abstinence supporters claim that the program is similar to many others. In the study
scientist found that over the next two years, only 33% of students had sex after going through the
abstinence only program while about half of the students who were taught only safe sex or taught
about both safe sex and abstinence began to have sex.
Argument #1

It is a waste of money to provide federal funds for a program that is not proven to work.
One of the main reasons that abstinence is ineffective is because it is unrealistic in the U.S.
Young people have delayed marriage and childbearing into their late twenties. Expecting
abstinence to persist until marriage is an unrealistic objective. Between 75 and 80% of
Americans have sex before the age of 19 and only 3% of Americans wait until marriage to have
sex. Abstinence-only programs may delay most of its students from having sex but most of the
time they do no remain abstinent. When these students do decide to have sex, they will not have
the proper knowledge about safe sex. Another reason why abstinence-only programs are
ineffective is because the study conducted in Steins article, Abstinence-only programs might
work, study says does not have enough information to be considered accurate. The study was
conducted on African-American students in four different middle schools in Northeastern United
States. For the study to be more accurate, it must be conducted on children of different
backgrounds and cultures from different parts of the U.S. because most likely, the results would
be different in different regions. The study also only followed the students for two years after it
was conducted. It may be true that sex was delayed for these students but when they did decide
to have sex, most likely the risk of them becoming pregnant or contracting an STI was much
higher due to the fact that they were not as aware about practicing safe sex. To fund a program
based off of such a study would definitely be a waste of government money.
Argument #2
Sexually mature minors have the right to receive accurate information about sex and
abstinence only education provides false and misleading sexual health information. United States
representative, Henry A. Waxman reported that over 80% of federal grants fund abstinence-only
programs that contain false, misleading, or distorted information about reproductive health

using exaggerations about the failure rates of contraception, the risks of abortion, and the health
vulnerabilities of the gay population. Students should not receive false information in order to
scare them out of having sex. If anything, creating awareness about the risks of STIs and
pregnancy alone will discourage sex at an early age. In addition to awareness about teen
pregnancy and STIs, students must know how to prevent these things from happening when they
do decide to have sex. Letting youth know about abstinence as a form of avoiding pregnancy and
STIs is completely fine but it is also important for youth to know about condoms and
contraception in case they do decide to have sex before marriage. Programs that only teach
abstinence as a form of protecting adolescence from STIs and avoiding teen pregnancy puts them
more at risk if the decide not to remain abstinent.
Conclusion
Besides the fact that abstinence-only programs are ineffective, as stated in the introduction, a
majority of American do not want this kind of sexual education. Therefore, it is pointless to
provide this form of education to most Americans. In order for sex education to be effective,
information about contraception and condoms must be provided; otherwise, adolescence will be
at risk. Since Abstinence-only programs do not inform their students of such, this form of sex
education simply does not work.
References
The Failure of Abstinence-Only Education: Minors Have a Right to Honest Talk about Sex by
Hazel Glenn Beh and Milton Diamond
Abstinence-only programs might work by Rob Stein

Science and Success: Sex Education and other programs that work to prevent teen pregnancy,
HIV and sexually transmitted infections

You might also like