Jordynn Nielsen 1

Trevor Smith

ENGL 1010

08 July 2020

Would American Teens Benefit from a More Comprehensive

Sexual Education?

For years, sexual education has been a controversial topic. In my field of work I

see so many people, from teens to middle aged adults, who are so uneducated around the

topic of sex. According to an article by Natalie Blanton October of 2019, close to

750,000 teens in the U.S. Would have become pregnant by the end of the year, and half

of the 20 million new cases of sexually transmitted diseases will be diagnosed in people

ages 15 to 24. The controversy surrounding how sex should be taught in schools are

based on arguments such as when an individual is ready to learn the about the topic, and

what exactly they should be taught. There are many views of sexual education in school

curriculum. Some believe the solution to public sexual education should be completely

abolished. Others look to solve the issue by maintaining an abstinence-only based

education system. Then there are those who believe the solution is to make sexual

education in schools more comprehensive.

It can be obvious as to why the sexual education curriculum has been so hard to

settle on. On one end, you have the more conventional and/or religious groups who

would prefer to teach their children sexual education themselves, when and how they

believe it is appropriate to do so. However, there are is the more liberal side that believes

it is important to provide youth with the tools they need to practice safe sex if they are not
 2

practicing absitinence. Politically, President Bush and Trump have advocated and funded

abstinence-only education, making it difficult for reform for the contrary. President

Obama funded programs that supported more comprehensive sexual education in schools.

Even when that was the case, before Trump came into office, schools nationwide taught

more abstinence based education. Some, however, would prefer that schools refrain

completely from teaching sexual education.

Many parents believe it is their right to be the sole teachers of sexual education. In

an article by Julie Blonigen published in May of 2016, Blonigen describes why it is

wrong to teach sexual education in schools, as it can, “attack and undermine the religious

faith of many students.” And it can, “break down the natural modesty of boys and girls.”

Based on the belief that youth are completely innocent and not exposed to sex in forms

other then sex ed in schools, many parents believe they should decide when and how to

expose their children to the topic. Blonigen states that a study, titled ​The Economics of

Family Planning on Underage Conceptions,​ found evidence that greater access to

contraception is associated with an increase in underage conceptions. Teaching youth that

abstinence is the only way to effectively prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted

infections is the only correct education that should be provided. One of Blonigen’s

arguments is that parents have no way of knowing nor finding out what exactly is being

taught in schools. Because of this, Blonigen argues that parents have no way of

controlling what their children are being taught unless they are able to sit alongside with

their child in class.

 3

Continuing on the idea that only parents should be allowed the responsibility to

give their children sexual education, Joshua Ciccone wrote an article in March of 2018 to

argue why that should be so. Ciccone states that, “Sex education should not be taugh in

schools under any circumstance…” but schools have turned into state-run machines for

brainwashing generations into thinking something is normal if it is taught in school.

(Ciccone). Parents argue that if something is “normalized” by school curriculum, a child

is more likely to engage in such activity. Ciccone even goes as far as to quote Dennis

Prager’s statement that, “The child’s allegiance is shafted from parents to the state.” After

Fremont, California used a book called, ​Your Health Today​ by McGraw Hill a some of

their school curriculum, Ciccone quotes a parent, Asfia Ahmed, who was opposed to the

book being used as, “It assumes the audience is already drinking alcohol, already doing

drugs, already have multiple sexual partners.” By allowing schools to teach sexual

education, Ciccone says that is where the state initiates a divide between parent and child.

Because it can be viewed as a morality-based topic, if sexual education is taught to

children in schools rather than by parents, it can undermine the parents relationship to

their children.

While there are those who would rather take full responsibility to teach their own

children sexual education, there are others who would be okay with sexual education

being taught in schools, however only if it is abstinence-only based teaching. In

December of 2005, Emma Elliot discusses claims on comprehensive sex education and

provides contradictory evidence on why sex education should only focus on abstinence

until marriage teachings. In her article ​What Your Teacher Didn’t Tell You About
 4

Abstinence​, Elliot contradicts eight claims about comprehensive sex education — which

she labels as “safe sex” — one of which being the teaching of abstinence along with

contraceptive use. Elliot states that by combining the teachings of abstinence and

teaching condom and contraceptive use, it is sending a mixed message to youth and gives

the example that, “We don’t tell children not to do drugs then give them clean syringes in

case they do.” Elliot’s statement does make a good point, youth are taught to completely

abstain from drug use, so to Elliot’s view, why should sexual education be taught

differently. Elliot argues that despite safe sex teaching you about condom and

contraceptive use, more than 8,000 teens become infected with sexually transmitted

diseases and infections every day, and about 40 percent of sexually active teens

eventually become pregnant out of wedlock. The solution, Elliot states, is that abstinence

is the only sure way to change these statistics.

Lastly, there are those who believe that it is important to teach comprehensive

sexual education to youth. In 2017, Megan Donovan discusses the importance of

comprehensive, age appropriate, and medically accurate education, arguing against those

who believe that abstinence-only education is best. Donovan’s first argument is that the

abstinence only programs create a shameful environment and ignore the needs of young

people who are sexually active. Not only that, but abstinence only programs reinforce the

stigmatization of sexual orientation or gender identity. (Donovan). Because teens who are

sexually active do not receive the proper attention or education, Donovan they are at

increased risk of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. Donovan

also mentions that not only are adolescents who receive a comprehensive sex education
 5

more likely to delay sexual activity, but this education can also aid in healthy future

relationships of youth.

Although there are good arguments and examples like that of Emma Elliots on

sexual education versus drug education and the teaching students to only abstain from

such activities, I believe it is crucial we implement a comprehensive sexual education

into youth’s curriculum. The logic I see behind it is, it is unrealistic to put so much

confidence and expectation in the ignorance of youth by only teaching abstinence before

marriage and discouraging the use of condoms and contraceptives. Much of the United

States population participates in premarital sex, and a good majority of those participants

are adolescents. No matter what curriculum is taught, whether that be abstinence only or

abstinence plus education, it is important to acknowledge that fact and provide youth with

the proper education in order to help prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually

transmitted infections. Providing a comprehensive health education will also provide

youth with the ability to carry on healthy, mutually protected relationships and decrease

the stigmatization of sexual orientation and gender identity, which is imperative to the

mental health of those struggling to find who they are.

 6

Works Cited Page

Blanton, Natalie. “Why Sex Education In The United States Needs An Update And How To Do

It.” 10 Oct. 2019.

https://scholars.org/contribution/why-sex-education-united-states-needs-update-and-how-

do-it​. Jul 24 2020.

Blonigen, Julie. “Ten Good Reasons to Oppose Public School Sex Education.”

Catholicparents.org. 22 May 2016.

https://www.catholicparents.org/category/cpo/education-cpo/sex-education/​. Jul. 22 2020

Ciccone, Joshua. “Sex Ed Should Stay Out of Schools​.​” Mnrepublic.com. 18 Mar. 2018.

https://mnrepublic.com/3279/opinion/sex-ed-should-stay-out-of-schools/​. Jul. 23 2020.

Donovan, Megan. “The Looming Threat to Sex Education: A Resurgence of Federal Funding for

Abstinence-only Programs?” Guttmacher.org. 30 Mar. 2017.

https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2017/03/looming-threat-sex-education-resurgence-feder

al-funding-abstinence-only-programs​. Jul 27 2020.

Elliot, Emma “What Your Teacher Didn’t Tell You About Abstinence.” ​concernedwormen.org.

1 Dec. 2005. ​https://concernedwomen.org/images/content/cwa_abstinence_brochure.pdf​.

Jul. 17 2020.