Sex Education in Schools

The Bush admin­is­tra­tion only funds sex-education pro­grams that only teach absti­nence. Now, how­ever, there is no doubt that this pol­icy is inef­fec­tive and dan­ger­ous:

Four out of 13 tri­als found that abstinence-plus-educated teenagers had fewer sex­ual part­ners, while the remain­der showed no change. Four­teen stud­ies reported that it increased con­dom use; 12 oth­ers reported no dif­fer­ence. Fur­ther­more, in the vast major­ity of cases, abstinence-plus par­tic­i­pants knew more about AIDS and HIV (the virus that causes the dis­ease) than their peers did. And the tuition often reduced the fre­quency of anal sex (which brings a greater chance of pass­ing on HIV than the vagi­nal option). In con­trast to the fears of the pro­tag­o­nists of abstinence-only edu­ca­tion, not one of the tri­als found that teenagers behaved in a riskier fash­ion in either the long or the short term after receiv­ing abstinence-plus instruction…

America’s gov­ern­ment ear­marks money for abstinence-only teach­ing, which is matched by indi­vid­ual states. It should review that policy—which is clearly no bet­ter than the alter­na­tives, and is prob­a­bly worse.

Let’s sum­ma­rize, shall we?

• Teenagers who learn about absti­nence and safe sex have sex with fewer or the same num­ber of people.
• More teenagers, if they have sex, will use con­doms if they learn about them.
• Teenagers who learn about absti­nence and safe sex learn about HIV and AIDS, which can be trans­mit­ted through means other than sex.
• Teenagers who learn about absti­nence and safe sex do not engage in riskier behavior.

If you want to deter­mine where a person’s (or government’s) val­ues lie, put two com­pet­ing pri­or­i­ties directly in con­flict with each other so that a choice must be made. The choice reflects which pri­or­ity is val­ued more highly. In the debate over sex edu­ca­tion, here is the con­flict that the Bush admin­is­tra­tion feels it is fac­ing: the desire not to encour­age teenagers to have pre-marital sex ver­sus the desire for teenagers not to become preg­nant or con­tract sexually-transmitted diseases.

Pres­i­dent Bush chooses the for­mer, and that is a trav­esty. Only a fool holds onto a belief when the facts do not sup­port the belief. As every­one who has been a teenager knows, peo­ple in high school — and, yes, some­times even those who are younger — are going to have sex. They do not need any encour­age­ment. So, we might as well teach them about safety and responsibility.

There is noth­ing wrong with telling teenagers: “If you don’t want to risk becom­ing preg­nant or con­tract­ing sexually-transmitted dis­eases, the only sure way to do that is not to have sex. But if you do have sex, remem­ber to do it safely and responsibly.“