SEX EDUCATION

Research proves program limits

I’d like to begin by applauding the Clarke County Board of Education for taking responsible and necessary measures to prevent the spread of STDs and curb the number of teen pregnancies by planning to switch to comprehensive sex education.

Greg Wilson, your piece is uninformed and na’ve. Abstinence-only programs do more harm than good, as is shown by independent research time and time again.

It is especially harmful to young women because it does not teach students about boundaries, rape and sexual assault or inform them about what options they do have if they are raped.

Furthermore, you cite a study by the Dept. of Health and Human Services that claims nine comprehensive sex education programs were ineffective, but who paid for that study? Our government, which funnels millions of dollars into abstinence-only programs.

Several independent researchers have found those who are taught only abstinence do not delay sexual intercourse for a more significant amount of time than those who are taught comprehensive sex ed. And when they do engage in sex, they are less likely to use protection and more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior. States across our country are beginning to refuse abstinence-only funds because it doesn’t work.

A further proof of the failure of abstinence-only education, which have been the norm under the Bush administration, the teen birth rate rose by 3 percent in 2006 – the first increase since 1991.

I will not even begin to refute your claim that we should all wait until marriage to have sex. That is your life choice, not mine, and it’s certainly not the life choice of the majority of our country, according to a study published last year in Public Health Reports: 95 percent of respondents had sex before marriage.

To truly help and prepare the young people of this country for adult decisions, we need to advocate comprehensive sex education and arm students with knowledge.

SARAH ROBERTS
Senior, Atlanta
Speech Communication

Abstinence fails to solve all issues

Greg Wilson’s opinion piece on abstinence is flawed in far too many ways to detail here, but I’ll make an effort to address a few of them.

First of all, abstinence is still taught in comprehensive sex ed. No one in these classes is telling kids to have sex.

Second, the classes teach kids how to protect themselves if they do have sex. And they are having sex, despite abstinence-only classes.

Abstinence-only classes have been shown to delay a teen’s sexual debut, but it also increases likelihood of having riskier sex than the kids who had comprehensive sex ed. Isn’t that quite the opposite of what Wilson said – because of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections we should not be teaching our children how to protect themselves? How does that make sense?

And let us not forget many of the kids who “abstain” from sex until marriage, or at least claim to, are actually participating in other risky sexual activity, since the traditional type of sexual activity is off limits.

Teaching people how to be protected if/when they chose to participate is the only sane thing to do. Let’s teach our teens how to be self-reliant.

BEN CLARK
Grad. student, Athens
Public Administration