Has Abstinence-Only Curriculum Impacted Sexually Transmitted Disease Rates - Essay Example

Has abstinence only curriculum impacted sexually transmitted disease rates? According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) sexually transmitted diseases are still a major health problem in the United States. There are approximately 19 million new cases each year and "almost half" of the new cases are in people between the ages of 15 and 24 (CDC, 2006, 1). This causes psychological and economic challenges for everyone. Although many teenagers have been through a variety of abstinence only curriculum programs, statistics show that abstinence alone does not stop pregnancy nor does it stop STD rates. In fact, these programs either have a negative impact or no impact at all. A few years ago abstinence only programs were very important to many school systems and parents who had children at those schools. These programs were brought about by parents who didnt want their children to be taught sex education in schools; they wanted to be the ones to tell their children. Also, many Christian parents wanted their children only to know about abstinence and nothing more. They didnt want to encourage their children to have sexual intercourse early and they wanted their children to wait until marriage. In the last 25 years or so the Congress of the United States put $1.5 billion on the abstinence only programs and only those programs that eight principles could get funded. These principles were: Abstinence has social, psychological, and health benefits Unmarried, school-age children are expected to abstain from sex. Abstinence is the only certain way to prevent out-of-wedlock pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. A mutually faithful and monogamous married relationship is the standard for sexual activity Sexual activity outside marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects. Out of wedlock childbearing is likely to harm a child, the parents and society. How to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to them. The importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sex (Section 510 [b], title V of Social Security Act, as quoted in Kaiser Foundation, 2002, 2). It is important to state these principles for this report because they are the basis for abstinence and provide some of the reasons why these programs didnt work, as I will describe in other parts of the report. To understand the impact of these programs on STDs all of the information I found talked about sex education and how it relates to whether teens stopped having early sex because of these programs. None of the studies showed that this was happening. In fact, every one of the reports I read said that these programs had failed because they didn’t stop teens; in many cases, teens that had gone through these programs were more likely to have unprotected sex. The challenge with abstinence is that teenagers have hormones that go wild after a certain time and they think they are n love with someone and sooner or later a guy is going to talk a girl into having sex. For many teens in these programs they have unprotected sex because no one told them what to do (other than abstinence) if this should happen. Part of the reason that I read about said that these programs fail because teens always find a way to break whatever the vow they made for abstinence. For instance, many teens think that oral or anal sex is still being abstinence because technically its not "intercourse." Since they arent really having intercourse then its okay in their minds. However, as Burton (2004) stated, this doesn’t stop them from getting STDs (Burton, 3). Although President Bush has funded $204 million in 2008 for these types of programs some states are refusing the money because they want to teach a more comprehensive program that also tells students what to do to avoid pregnancy and STDs (Burton, 3). Many abstinence programs have been evaluated by different sources. The Siecus Public Policy Office compiled several research reports that I found interesting to this study. Mathmatica Policy Research, Inc. on behalf of the US Department of Health and Human Services found that there was "no evidence that abstinence-only programs increased rates of sexual abstinence" (qtd. in Siecus 2007, par. 2). They further found that there was no difference in teens who were in the programs or who werent involved with the programs in terms of their abstaining from sex. Another "meta study" that was published in the British Medical Journal looked at 13 abstinence programs that involved 16,000 students. They found that the abstinence only programs didn’t change the sexual behavior of teens and it didn’t change the rates of pregnancy or STDs (qtd. in Siecus 2007, par. 6-8). Some studies have looked at virginity pledges and whether they were affective in stopping teens from having sex. One such study by Berman and Bruckner said that the teens who made these pledges delayed for no more than 18 months and when they did have sex, they were "one-third less likely to use condoms or seek medical testing and treatment" (qtd. in Siecus, par. 13). What I found interesting though was that in another study done by The Journal of the American Medical Association found that younger kids, who are in grades 7-12 take the pledge more seriously and abstained from sex (qtd. in Rector, 2002, 5). Also according to Rector, STDs are very high right now ("epidemic proportions") and that every year three million teenagers get STDs which is about one in four teens that are sexually active (1). There are several studies that said that the challenges with the programs are that they don’t give accurate information. For instance, as we saw in the list, many programs say that the only way to prevent STDs and unplanned pregnancies is total abstinence. Although this is true, they dont tell the rest of the story which is to give information about birth control methods. Murphy (2007) also showed that these curricula can distort the failure rate of condoms and dont let teens know that condoms offered protection against STDs (Murphy, 1). This sounds like brainwashing to me. Its like they don’t want their kids to have sex and if they don’t teach them about it, they wont do it. However, we see that they do it anyway. Hauser (2003) at Advocates for Youth evaluated 11 programs that were abstinence only and found that none showed short or long-term benefits and none had a "lasting, positive impact" (2). I find this interesting and I don’t understand why these programs are still being promoted and funded since research shows they arent affective. I also found some very scary statistics: Three million teenagers acquire an STD each year. One in four sexually active teenagers acquires a new STD each year. Two-thirds of all people who acquire STDs are under age 25. Eight new STD "germs" have been identified since 1980, including HIV One-quarter of all new HIV infections are found in people under age 22. (McIlhaney and Haffner, 1) The quoted these statistics and then talked about how these programs arent working. They said in one California High School, many students went and engaged in sex more frequently after the program. The solution in all of the reading I did said that the best program for teens was a comprehensive program that taught about abstinence, but also taught about STDs and pregnancy prevention. They said that part of the reason why teens are having so many problems with STDs is that they dont know what to do when they want to have sex. They don’t know about condoms or birth control pills and some teens dont think it will happen to them. I agree that this is important to help teens know all the basics about sex. The CDC says that Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, and Syphilis are the three top STDs along with HIV and we already saw that teens are having problems. They said that Chlamydia happened most often to women. I think that this needs to be controlled and its not going to happen by telling teens they cant have sex. The thing is, there are a lot of teens who wont have sex and we really don’t have to worry about them. But what about those who are going to do it anyway? Why are we not supporting to give them the information they need? It may be that when they find out the entire story, some will become abstinent because they wont want the hassle from it. Many girls I am sure dont want babies before they are married but they may want to have sex. I dont think that is right, but I also dont think it is right to create more problems for them in the name of abstinence. I hope that more studies will be done and that some scientific studies will work to show that these programs need more in them than just a bit of brainwashing. One other thing that concerns me is that the 8 principles I used seem to only support one viewpoint and there are many different viewpoints. I think it is very important to make sure that all viewpoints are shown. I think this would be healthier for teens and the United States. Works Cited Burton, Mary Q. n.d. "Sex, Lies and Abstinence: A New Study Reveals That Teens Are Still Having Sex, Even Though States Like Kentucky Try to Stop It". Louisville Eccentric Observer. 28 April 2008. . Hacker, Diane. "Documenting Sources MLA Style." 28 April 2008. < http:/ /www.dianahacker.com /resdoc/p04_c08_s1.html>. Hauser, Debora. 2003. "Five Years of Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Education: Assessing the Impact." Advocates for Youth. 28 April 2008. < http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/ PUBLICATIONS/stateevaluations.pdf>. Kaiser Family Foundation. 2002. "Sex Education in the U.S.: Policy and Politics". Update. 28 April 2008. . McIlhaney, Joe S. and Haffner, Debra W. 29 September 1997. "Q: Are Abstinence-Only Sex- Education Programs Good for Teenagers?" Insight on News. 13:36. News World Communications, Inc: Gale Group. 2002. 28 April 2008. . Rector, Robert. 5 April 2002. "The Effectiveness of Abstinence Education Programs in Reducing Sexual Activity Among Youth. The Heritage Foundation: Backgrounder. #1533. 28 April 2008. . Siecus Public Policy Office. 2007. "What the Research Says…" Fact Sheet. 28 April 2008. 28 April 2008. . United States. Department of Health and Human Services. STD Summary Surveillance Report Trends in Reportable Sexually Transmitted Diseases in the United States 2006. Washington: Center for Disease Control (CDC), 2006. November 2007. 28 April 2008. < http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/trends2006.htm>. Read More