Melissa

Billing
ENGL 1010-401
Joining the Conversation

Abstinence Only Sexuality Education: Why it does not work
Problem: The US is ranked #1 among highly developed nations for teen pregnancy rates
and sexually transmitted diseases. What is the best way to combat this epidemic? Who
should win the battle of Sexuality Education in America? There are two major positions
when it comes to the teaching of sex education to American kids. In one corner we have
those who advocate for comprehensive sex ed, and in the other corner those who advocate
teaching abstinence only until marriage education. Christina F. Rickenback thinks that
abstinence only sex education sets a clear expectation and believes that kids need to be taught
that abstinence is the only truly effective form of birth control (Rickenback 349). Abstinence
only teaches no sex outside marriage. It does not address other forms of contraceptives or
protection STIs, nor does it clearly define sex. Patrick Malone and Monica Rodriguez argue that
young people need to be armed with the tools to protect themselves, and this includes knowledge
of contraceptions and safe sex practices taught by comprehensive sex ed (Malone 22). Can
abstinence only education really be an effective educational tool? Does it not make more
sense to actually teach when we are calling it education?

Until 2009 abstinence-only-until-marriage (AOUM) was the only federally funded

form of Sexuality education. To this day AOUM receives the lions share of funding
(Stanger-Hall 1). To receive federal funding abstinence only education must comply with
the A-H guidelines, which teach in part, everything that will go wrong if young people
decide to have sex outside of marriage.

The entire crux of these guidelines is to teach youth why they should not have sex
outside of marriage. They teach that having sex outside marriage harms you, not only
physically, but also psychologically and socially as well. These guidelines do not even
address the fact that all teens will have sexual feelings, which are a normal part of
development, and most will have sex before marriage. They do not teach that sex is an
absolutely normal and healthy part of life regardless of your marital status. Instead they
make kids feel shame if they act upon these feelings. All these guidelines teach is how much
of a failure teens will be if they choose to have sex before marriage.
Some proponents of AOUM also argue that if you teach about contraceptives and
safe sex practices you are sending mixed messages to kids (Stanger-Hall 1). That by
teaching kids how to deal with the urges that they will experience, and how to be safe if
they decide that they would like to act on these feelings, we are giving permission for them
to have sex before marriage. These guidelines ignore entirely that you need to have
information about contraception even after marriage. What about people that choose to not
marry? Should they remain abstinent throughout their lives?
Abstinence only programs are also rife with medical inaccuracies or just plain leave
out important information. Abstinence only does not teach the signs, symptoms, or how
you can and cant contract STIs (oral sex, anal sex, etc). Not knowing the signs and
symptoms of STIs leads to putting of getting treatment, which can lead to further
complications (Epstein 348). The Why kNOw Abstinence Education program teachers
manual says that condoms have a 14% failure rate in preventing pregnancies. This manual
also says that because you can contract HIV anytime of the month, and because the HIV
virus is smaller than sperm the failure rate of condoms to prevent HIV and AIDS is much

greater then the failure rate of condoms to prevent teen pregnancy (Malone 22). These
statements are medically inaccurate. The 14% failure rate that is cited is known as typical
or user failure rates, and include people who do not use condoms consistently or
correctly, such as those who put a condemn in the middle of intercourse, those who only
sometimes use condoms, and those who put a condom on inside out (Malone 22). In reality,
according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the failure rate of a consistently and
correctly used condom is 2%. Also, according to the CDC, laboratory studies have
demonstrated that latex condoms provide an essentially impermeable barrier to particles
the size of HIV."
Teens who take virginity pledges, promoted by abstinence only until marriage, may
delay the first time that they have sex, but most do not make it until marriage and are less
likely to use contraception. Also, teens who are taught abstinence only tend to participate
in other sexual behaviors, like oral and anal sex, believing that because there is no vaginal
penetration that does not count. This is a clear result of abstinence only programs not
clearly defining what constitutes sex. Because these acts are not considered to be sex by
teens they are often times unaware that you can still contract STIs through this type of
sexual activity, and that safe sex practices still need to be followed. It is vital that we give
kids all the information necessary to protect them.
As far as studies that look at the effectiveness of abstinence only until marriage
programs, there are some that show the benefits of Abstinence Only education are really
seen at the 18 month and beyond. With up to a 30% difference in the amount of teens
having sex after receiving an abstinence only education compare to students that had
comprehensive sex ed (What Works Clearinghouse). However, even advocates for this type

education will admit that many of theses studies use a small sample size and relatively few
of the abstinence only sex education programs have been properly evaluated. Of the 46
curricula listed in the Abstinence Clearinghouse Directory of Abstinence Resources, no
published evaluations exist that examine the effects of any of them on sexual behavior (Denny
414).
When speaking about comprehensive sex education it is important to note that this
approach does not just teach all sex all the time, as some abstinence proponents would
have you believe. Abstinence is also taught in most comprehensive programs. However, in
the likely event that teens choose not to remain abstinent until, comprehensive sex ed also
teaches kids all the facts so they can make informed and safe choices.
According to public opinion polls, eighty-two percent of adults support a
comprehensive sex education curriculum that includes information on abstinence and
other methods of preventing pregnancy and STDs (Schwarz 129), and yet congress still
spends millions and millions of dollars on abstinence only education every year. The use of
federal funds to advance moral, and religious agendas, even if it is not what the majority of
Americans want, is not a new. However, abstinence-only education crosses the line by
teaching medical inaccuracies and religious ideologies.
There is no scientific evidence that abstinence only works, just the contrary. The U.S.
has 750,000 teen pregnancies annually (Schwarz 115) that tell us that our teens are not
remaining abstinent. We see a large difference in teen pregnancy and STIs between states
that teach abstinence only and those who teach comprehensive sex education. In states
where abstinence only is taught you have the greatest number of teen pregnancies and
STIs. States that do not even mention abstinence only have the lowest rates (Malone).

 If there is not scientific reason to still teach abstinence only, then the reason must
be one of morality and religion. The federal government should definitely not be in the
business of legislating morality. Leave the teaching of morality up to parents. Considering
that we are supposed to have a separation between church and state, religious
organizations need to stay out of the business of making laws.
In stark contrast to the A-H guidelines are the Comprehensive sexuality guidelines:
The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) organized a
national task force that developed four primary goals for comprehensive sex education
programs. These guidelines teach, in short, medically accurate information regarding
contraception and safe sex. What exactly constitutes sex, taking responsibility for yourself
and the decisions you make. How to have a healthy relationship with others and yourself,
and provide an opportunity for young people to question and explore, their sexual attitudes
in regards to their family's values and to develop their own values (Schwarz)(SIECUS
website).
There is no shame to be found in these guidelines, only the information needed to
make informed choices that are right for you. No using scare tactics to get you to make the
choice others think best for you. They teach teens that the feelings they will experience are
a normal and healthy part of human development. These guidelines tell our children that
whatever choice they make regarding their sex life, it is just that, their choice. Nobody can
make that choice for them. If you chose to wait until marriage to have sex, great, if not here
are they ways you can practice safe sex.
We need to teach comprehensive sexuality education, because abstinence is
unrealistic, and we have the unfortunate numbers to prove that. I think that we are foolish

by believing that by just telling kids not to do something they are going to listen. I also
believe that when we teach kids abstinence only and they fail, which most will, they will
feel shame about themselves because they have been taught all the horrors of pre-marital
sex. Sex is a completely natural part of life and kids need to know the responsible way to
handle the feelings that they are going to experience. Do I wish that teens would wait until
marriage, or to be older if they choose not to marry, to have sex? Yes. Do I think this is
realistic? NO. America needs to fix this problem. Do we want to continue to have children
that feel ashamed of themselves for natural feelings and actions? We need to stop teaching
shame, and start teaching responsibility. It is our responsibility as parents and educators to
make sure our children have all the knowledge they need to have to safely enter the world
and make choices. Information about sex is no different. By not giving youth the
information that they will need to make informed decisions about their sex life, we are
doing our children a grave injustice. We should save the morality lessons for home and
church, and while at school actually teach, and not preach, when we are calling it education.

Works cited

Denny, G, and M Young. "An Evaluation Of An Abstinence-Only Sex Education Curriculum:

An 18-Month Follow-Up." Journal Of School Health 76.8 (2006): 414-422. CINAHL Complete.

Epstein, Jane MSN, CPNP Does Abstinence-Only Education Put Adolescents at Risk?
MCN, The American Journal of Maternal/Child Nursing Issue: Volume
31(6), November/December 2006, p 348

"Guidelines." Pollen Terminology (2009): 7-9. Siecus.org. Web. 23 July 2015.
<siecus.org/data/global/images/guidelines.pdf>.

Malone, Patrick, and Monica Rodriguez. "Comprehensive Sex Education vs. Abstinence-
Only-Until-Marriage Programs." Human Rights 2011: 5. JSTOR Journa

Rickenback, Christina F. MSN, APRN, CPNP. MCN, The American Journal of Maternal/Child
Nursing Issue: Volume 31(6), November/December 2006, p 349

Schwarz, Amy. Comprehensive Sex Education: Why Americas Youth Deserve the Truth
about Sex. Journal of Public Law & Policy 29.1 (2007): 115-160

Stanger-Hall, Kathrin F., and David W. Hall. "Abstinence-Only Education And Teen
Pregnancy Rates: Why We Need Comprehensive Sex Education In The U.S." Plos ONE 6.10
(2011):