Sexual Education in Schools

Sexual Education in Schools

Crystal M. Dell
Jacksonville State University

Author Note
Crystal M. Dell, HPER Department, Jacksonville State University.
Crystal Dell is now at the Secondary Education Mathematics Department, Jacksonville
State University.
Correspondence concerning this research paper should be addressed to Crystal Dell,
Secondary Education Mathematics Department, Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville, AL
36262. Contact: coachdell13@hotmail.com

Sex Education

Abstract
Providing students with the knowledge needed for sexual education has been a struggle
for years. Sex education in the public schools is a controversial subject, despite the large
majority of Americans who favored such programs since the 1940s (Furstenberg, Moore, &
Peterson, 1985, p. 1331). Abstinence is endorsed as the only certain way to avoid out-ofwedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems
(Bleakley, Hennessy, & Fishbein, 2006, p. 1151). However, a recent review has found that there
is no current evidence that supports that abstinence-only programs delay sex or reduce teen
pregnancy (Bleakley, 2006). Abstinence-plus programs emphasize abstinence and delay of
sexual debut but also offer information on contraception and protection against STDs
(Bleakley, 2006, p. 1152). It has been proven that, comprehensive programs may delay
initiation of sexual intercourse, reduce frequency of sex, reduce frequency of unprotected sex,
and reduce number of sexual partners (Bleakley, 2006, p. 1152). Students must be educated on
all aspects of sexual encounters to be better informed to make responsible sexual decisions.

Sex Education

Sexual Education in Schools

Introduction
When it comes to todays youth, sex knowledge is increasingly becoming more important
in protecting young adults from sexually transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancies. It has
been proven that students who are exposed to sex education tend to practice contraception and
are less likely to become pregnant (Furstenberg, 1985). According to Furstenberg (1985),
prevalence of sexual intercourse is over 50 percent higher among youth who did not have a
course in sex education (p. 1331). Sex education programs are not implemented to undermine
the parents or any religious views, but to reduce the level of sexual activity of young adults
(Furstenberg, 1985).
Communication between parents and students about sex education is important and can
have an influence on the teens choices about sex (Whitaker, Miller, May, & Levin, 1999).
Communication about sex as a means to promote safer sex is especially important for
adolescents (Whitaker, 1999, p. 117). Whitaker (1999) states that, a discussion that consists
solely of a parents demanding that a child refrain from having sex may send a message that
everything about sex is to be avoided, and may thus suppress the teenagers desire to discuss sex
with a partner (p. 117). It is important to have an open conversation with adolescents about sex
because the consequences of not knowing can be irreversible. While the concept of do not do it
and you will be safe may be reliable but it is not realistic.
Many believe that virginity pledges help delay an adolescents sexual debut
(Bleakley, 2006). Although this has been successful, many have reported that they did not use a
condom at first intercourse (Bleakley, 2006). In addition, those whom have pledged abstinence

Sex Education

are more likely to experience oral or anal sex in substitution for vaginal sex (Bleakley, 2006).
Many believe that if their child has pledged abstinence that they are safe from the horrors of sex,
but if they are substituting other sexual activity for the act of sex then they are still at the same
risk of STDs as those who have not pledged (Bleakley, 2006).
Federal requirements for abstinence-only education programs focus on the promotion of
abstinence until marriage as a lifestyle choice (Bleakley, 2006, p. 1151). These programs have
been endorsed as the only way to prevent pregnancy, STDs and other associated health problems
(Bleakley, 2006). There are 8 requirements or components to receive federal funding for this
type of program (Bleakley, 2006).
Counter Argument
Many believe that abstinence is the only way to prevent pregnancy, STDs and other
health problems (Bleakley, 2006). Although teen pregnancy, birth, and abortion rates declined
in recent years, rates in the United States are persistently higher compared with other developed
countries (Bleakley, 2006, p. 1151). Studies have shown a decrease but the issue is still ongoing
and global. Federal funded programs have been implemented to promote abstinence
(Bleakley, 2006).
The program must teach exclusively the social, psychological, and health gains obtained
for abstaining from sexual activity (Bleakley, 2006). In addition, abstinence from sexual activity
outside of marriage is the expected standard for all adolescents (Bleakley, 2006). It must teach
that abstinence is the only way to prevent pregnancy, STDs, and other health problems
(Bleakley, 2006). Sexual activity outside the context of marriage is harmful and mutually
faithful monogamous relationships in the context of marriage are the expected standard for

Sex Education

human sexual activity (Bleakley, 2006). The program must teach that bearing children out of
wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the parents, and society
(Bleakley, 2006). It must also teach adolescents how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol
and drug use increase the risk a vulnerability to sexual advances (Bleakley, 2006). Finally, it
teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity
(Bleakley, 2006).
Studies have shown that the majority of adults in the United States favor a more balanced
approach on sex education, regardless of their political ideology (Bleakley, 2006). According to
Bleakley (2006), the majority of respondents disagreed with the beliefs that abstinence-only
programs were effective in preventing unplanned pregnancies and that teaching condom use
instruction encourages teens to have sex (p. 1153). In a study asking about effectiveness of
abstinence-only vs. comprehensive programs, 80% of respondents believed a combination of
abstinence and other methods was more effective (Bleakley, 2006).
It is important to provide parents with the tools to be able to have an open conversation
with their children about sex (Whitaker, 1999). parent-teenager communication about
sexuality and about sexual risks may promote teenagers discussions with their partners about
sex, but only when parents communicate with their teenagers in a skilled and open manner
(Whitaker, 1999, p. 120). When a parent demands solely that a child refrains from having sex,
the message may be altered to the point that the child thinks that everything about sex should
simply be avoided and they may not be able to discuss sex with a partner in the future (Whitaker,
1999).

Sex Education

Sex education is important in providing knowledge and protection for adolescents

(Furstenberg, 1985). those exposed to sex education were more likely to practice
contraception and less likely to become premaritally pregnant (Furstenberg, 1985, p. 1331).
According to Furstenberg (1985), sex education programs reduce the level of sexual activity,
and that they supplement, rather than undermine, the influence of parents (Furstenberg, 1985, p.
1332).
Conclusion
I believe that providing a comprehensive program that teaches adolescents the dangers,
risks, and ways of prevention is the most effective form of sexual education. The RIPPLE
study is a randomized controlled trial of peer-led sex education in English secondary
schools..In experimental schools peer educators in Year 12 were recruited in two successive
cohorts and, having received a standardized training programme, delivered classroom-based sex
education sessions to Year 9 students (Strange, Forrest, & Oakley, 2002, p327). This kind of
program can be successful in the United States because our society is obsessed with what our
peers think and believe about each other.
Peer-led pragrammes are popular with young peer educators, and professionals are
enthusiastic about an approach that appears to offer accessible and relevant health information to
young people in an exciting way (Strange, 2002, p327). The goal of this study is to improve
knowledge and attitudes related to STDs, enhance the quality and self-confidence of sexual
relationships, reduce sexual risk-taking and decrease the number of unplanned pregnancies
(Strange, 2002).

Sex Education

According to Strange (2002), peer educators reported increased confidence about

getting what they want from sexual relationships and said that participation in the programme
had, or would, influence their sexual behavior (p. 335). The RIPPLE study results suggest
significant increases in peer educators confidence about running sex education sessions
(Strange, 2002, p. 335). It is easier for a teenager to listen and understand information if it is
delivered by someone they can trust. I believe that this is where this program can help todays
adolescents.
Adolescent parenthood is more wide-spread in the United States than in any other
developed country, and it is most common in the rural United States (Piotrowski & Hedeker,
2016, p. 32). Survey of middle school students have shown that up to 20% of sixth graders and
almost 42% of eighth graders have engaged in sexual intercourse (Piotrowski, 2016). The Be
the Exception program is a developmentally appropriate holistic intervention for adolescents
(Piotrowski, 2016, p. 32). This program places emphasis on promoting attitudes, behaviors, and
skills that support positive youth development (Piotrowski, 2016). Risk behaviors such as
alcohol, drugs and peer violence are discussed (Piotrowski, 2016). Comparison group students
attended an unrelated assembly with a speaker on topics not covered in the Be the Exception
program. Both comparison and intervention students continued participation in standard health
education. Be the Exception supplemented health education instruction (Piotrowski, 2016,
p. 33).
The program proved to have a positive impact on sexual intercourse behavior outcomes
(Piotrowski, 2016). In the intervention group, 1.9% reported ever having had sexual
intercourse; 6.3% of the comparison group did (Piotrowski, 2016, p. 36). The intervention
group significantly more often reported being in the no activity, holding hands, and hugging and

Sex Education

kissing stages than in the presexual intimacy behaviors, touching above and below waist, other
sex and sexual intercourse stages than the control group (Piotrowski, 2016, p. 37). Be the
Exception had a strong positive impact on young adolescents: lower occurrence of ever having
engaged in sexual intercourse, lower occurrence of sexual intercourse in the past 3 months, and
lower occurrence of presexual physical intimacy behaviors (Piotrowski, 2016, p. 37). I believe
these are the kinds of programs that we need to implement across the United States.

Sex Education

References

Bleakley, A., Hennessy, M., & Fishbein, M. (2006). Public Opinion on Sex Education in US
Schools. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160(11), 1151.
doi:10.1001/archpedi.160.11.1151
Furstenberg, F. F., Moore, K. A., & Peterson, J. L. (1985). Sex education and sexual experience
among adolescents. American Journal of Public Health, 75(11), 1331-1332.
doi:10.2105/ajph.75.11.1331
Piotrowski, H. Z., & Hedeker, D. (2016). Evaluation of the Be the Exception Sixth-Grade
Program in Rural Communities to Delay the Onset of Sexual Behavior. American
Journal of Public Health, 106(1), 32-38. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2016.303438
Strange, V., Forrest, S., & Oakley, A. (2002). Peer-led sex education--characteristics of peer
educators and their perceptions of the impact on them of participation in a peer
education programme. Health Education Research, 17(3), 327-338.
doi:10.1093/her/17.3.327
Whitaker, D. J., Miller, K. S., May, D. C., & Levin, M. L. (1999). Teenage Partners'
Communication About Sexual Risk and Condom Use: The Importance of ParentTeenager Discussions. Family Planning Perspectives, 31(3), 117. doi:10.2307/2991693