Opinion: Abstinence-only program advocate is a danger to kids

Abstinence education is effective. Abstinence ONLY education is a joke.
Any mystery why more teens are having oral sex nowadays?

Reply

Perhaps, L. I guess I'd rather see it pitched as smart decision making than as any push towards abstinence. Waiting until you're 18 makes a certain kind of sense. But waiting until marriage never seemed sensible to me. But, then again, I'm not exactly altar boy material.

Reply

I have no problem with someone teaching my kids that abstinence is the only 100% proven way to avoid both pregnancy and disease. This is common sense from a health and hygeine point of view. But incorporating the "until marriage" part takes it beyond health and hygiene. I`m all for encouraging marriage, but not for imposing it as the only choice.

And kids who do not choose abstinence until marriage (and not everyone will) NEED alternative information, just like kids who choose to get drunk at a friend`s party need a safe ride home. The most disturbing part of this article is this -- "What teachers like Laurie Sponsler can’t do, if they follow the curricula, is tell students that when condoms are used correctly, they are nearly always effective. And if a student asks how to use a condom, Sponsler's not supposed to tell."

Reply

There's nothing wrong with teaching that abstinence is safe, although they could use a better definition that includes the danger of STD from anal and oral sex. Kids don't seem to be getting the message.

I'm willing to bet the parents who push the hardest for abstinence only education are the same parents who won't let their kids take the sex education classes, no matter how much abstinence dogma and how little useful information is incuded. I've heard a few of them during our ongoing us v. them Planned Parenthood battle. They are frightened and angry because PP teaches sex education in a nonjudgmental way, complete with instructions and supplies. They would be horrified (on the behalf of other parents of course), if the schools began giving accurate and comprehensive information. Of course, they don't teach their kids themselves (except for abstinence, hellfire, and brimstone). That would be immoral.

Meantime, girls keep getting pregnant, and girls and boys both keep getting sick. And this administration keeps it's head firmly in the sand.

Reply

People are totally ignoring the fact that "abstinence until marriage" excludes upwards of 10% of the teen population. If you're gay, you can get married (legally) so you're not suppose to ever be sexually active? I guess the people who push for abstinence until marriage would probably agree with that. *shakes head*

My husband and I were discussing this article earlier today. It occurred to me, that maybe the parent that doesn't want their teen using condoms if they've chosen to be sexually active feels that their child DESERVES whatever befalls them. Kind of like if you choose to be sexually active prior to marriage that you dserve to get pregnant or get an STD.

Reply

I sent in a much too long comment about punishment a while ago and didn't want to start repeating myself (it's an early sign of senility). Of course that's a lot of it. Pregnancy and STD are wonderful clubs to hold over kids' heads. And the parents get to say "I told you so".

CA law allows kids to get birth control information and condoms, etc. without parental notification. The same group that is fighting sex education in the schools and thinks Planned Parenthood is the Anti-Christ is also fighting the California law.

Homosexuality is a moral affront to them. They either try to "change" their poor kids by locking them away in camps or throw them out on the street for polluting the family. Anyone who has lived in San Francisco is familiar with "thrown out on the street". My gay son used to bring them home and we tried to help. Many of my gay friends in the city were former members of one church or another who had excommunicated them.

I'm doing it again - sorry. That twisted thinking makes me so angry.

Reply

If you already are dead set against abstinence what is the point in reporting on it.... there is none and that is where we get twisted one-sided articles. This interview involved one man and his personal opinions - not an overview of the curriculum. And as far as kids not using condoms - if you look at the statistics over time the percentage of all sexual active teens using condoms decreases with age. It’s not some magical lapse for teens that pledged. Look at where you are getting your data and what numbers really say. As for forgetting gay teens- the words marriage easily become committed lifetime relationship. Moral, immoral or otherwise there are things that put kids at risk - sexual activity is one of those things. Condoms are not 100% effective against anything! That is a fact. Teens do not use condoms as consistently or as correctly as anyone could hope. We need to reframe love to include sexual intimacy not be sexual intimacy. We need to help teens make healthy choices not force our mistakes and personal passions and unrestraint down their throats. And maybe for a change we should expect something more of them, rather than assuming they are only capable of the most unrestraint of behavior.

I am supposed to forget the teachings of my faith and embrace everyone and every behavior, so maybe you could step away from a rosy view of freedom in everything for everyone and realize that there is a real risk and danger in teen sexual activity- and we owe it to teens to tell them and in turn show then HEALTHY lifestyles and choices.

Reply

Yes, I think we would all agree that abstinence is the only 100% proven method of preventing birth or STDs. But that's obviously not happening in the world you and I live in...reality.

In my opinion (aka: my perfect world), the kids need to be given the information and guided by their parents. They should receive sex education with all the fixins...benefits of abstinence, pros and cons of birth control types, how sexually transmitted diseases are transferred and how much they can [negatively] affect your life. Then the parents should take an active role in their child's life discussing the information and how it should be used. Of course I don't want my daughter to start having sex at 15, but IF she does I want to be damn sure she knows about condoms and that oral sex is not safe sex. It just seems like common sense to me, but apparently not to some people.

Reply

My opinion is that abstinance needs to be taught from early on. Parents have a tendency to wait until their kids are 15 or 16 to talk about abstinance and then think its a good idea to talk about birth control. Sorry to late.

Some kids start forming their sexual ideas at age 8 (not in a sexual desire way). It is at that important time that kids see what parents are like with their own sexuality coupled with t.v. and what they are hearing from peers. By the time many of them are 12, they are dating and by 13 they are having sex. As a counselor, I have seen it over and over, parents do not take the responsiblity themselves to teach abstinance at an early age. They leave it to the t.v. and to the school, then blame others for "to much oral sex" that has been going on.

Once the foundation is laid for abstinance, then contraceptives can be introduced. But believe me, a virus like genital worts still spread, even with a condom.

Not always will kids stay abstinate, but the chances are better when the parents are teaching them and behaving properly themselves.

Reply