If you've watch the news recently you probably now know that abstinence only education doesn't decrease chances of teens having sex (and consequently having babies or getting s.t.d.s).
Here's Dan Abrams laying down the facts.....with help from Rachel Maddow and no help from National Abstinence Education Association's Valerie Huber.
I just love the part when Maddow says "Yeah whenever I evaluate myself I look pretty good too" about Valerie Huber's research.
The strange thing to me about abstinence only education is that it makes it seem like you will never have sex. Or perhaps its that when you do you must become a baby making machine,,, one kid after another. Because otherwise shouldn't there be some tips for the kids who are going to get married in a couple years. A lot of kids (especially in the abstinence only areas of the country) get married at 18, 19, 20. So why can't we throw in some education for them.
Ideally I think contraceptive education should be taught every year you're in school- probably starting in jr. high. For me it took up maybe 3 classes in health class in 9th grade. Those three classes seemed to cover everything from what genitals are to the different stages of a babies growth during pregnancy. All I remember are a few pictures of venereal diseases. Oh and also I remember there was a girl in the class who had already had a baby. When our health teacher did the whole "Abstinence is obviously the safest method but now we're gonna talk about some other methods of contraception" the girl flipped out about how much she loved her baby and how glad she was to have her.
Personally, by the time I finally lost ye ole V card that info I learned had been long forgotten. So perhaps the lesson to be learned from both the girl in my 9th grade and my own experience is that education is hardly ever too much, too soon, or too late. Its education after all, not a call to arms.....you can do with it what you will. Other wise you end up getting your facts from kids on the school bus, first boyfriends, cosmo magazine, and if you're lucky the internet. When the internet is your trusted source something is just not right.
As Dan Abrams says in his closing argument -this is 200 million dollars our country is giving to abstinence only education - a system that doesn't seem to be working.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Wow, the first time I ever heard about abstinence-only education I must've been in my early teens and I knew it was the most illogical thing ever. And I mean if you are giving them "accurate information" about contraceptives like that woman is trying to argue, then that's not abstinence ONLY! Seriously, be consistent. I had a sex-ed that I now see as lacking but it gave accurate info for preventing STIs and pregnancy and I still heard the message that abstinence is more effective than the rest. I mean that is common sense that staying away from sex will keep you away from potential problems from sex but for most it only happens for so long.
I think I got a couple hours in grades 7 and 8 (maybe more?) and 5 periods in grade 9. It was almost adequate but not enough. I've realized two people I live with (1st and 2nd year of uni) either hadn't heard of the clitoris or didn't know the vagina wasn't external. Also, I don't remember hearing anything about anal sex.
Post a Comment