|
|
Post by CrimsonENDvy on Sept 9, 2008 12:32:49 GMT -5
Hey guys!! So I'm presenting a seminar in about a month on the differences between sex education versus abstinence education...and I just want some input from this message board. I'm trying to present this from an unbiased viewpoint so both sides would be appreciated.
What do you guys think? Which is more effective or which would you THINK would be more effective? Or do neither work? OPINIONS PEOPLE!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by 123Diva on Sept 9, 2008 12:35:32 GMT -5
I think that the 2 can go hand in hand. More to come...
|
|
|
|
Post by 123Diva on Sept 9, 2008 12:41:38 GMT -5
Abstinence education can be very successful, but only to a point. There comes a point when hormones cloud judgement, the fear of parental wrath diminishes, and even the fear of God and godly principles is no longer a dominant force.
It is so much of a stronger argument to say God says wait and abstinence is the only safe way to go, when that is combined with facts about STDs, unwanted pregnancies, emotional repercussions of being sexually active, etc...
Put it this way one day when I am a parent, if I have a disobedient child I rather my child be healthy and childlessly disobedient then disobediently unhealthy (with an STD) and/or an unwanted pregnancy.
Abstinence = best case scenario
But if they do decide to have sex, know the facts and practice SAFER sex...because we all know that there is no SAFE sex. There is nothing wrong with teaching facts. However, I want my kids to hear it first at home. I want to be the one indoctrinating them, not a shcool system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Sept 9, 2008 12:49:37 GMT -5
Teach sex as a function of health education. Sex is a normal and necessary function of human existance and should not be hidden from students.
Having said that, young people need to know about the possible negative consequences of choosing to have sex before they are mature enough to accept responsibility for their actions. Abstinence is the only way to guarantee not getting pregnant or contracting a sexually transmitted disease (rape excluded).
I am for teaching abstinence, 100% but I am for teaching it responsibily. Educating young people about the function of sex is not wrong. Even educating them about contraception is acceptable as it's a way to protect our youth.
Teaching abstinence only is NEGLIGENCE at best!! In some cases, it can be considered Child Endangerment! It's a stupid (yes, that was judgemental) and ass backwards and a way to use bad religious choices to inform policy.
|
|
|
|
Post by No Screen Name on Sept 9, 2008 12:49:47 GMT -5
Abstinence and sex education can go hand-in-hand (but studies show abstinence education is generally effective in getting teens to DELAY having sex until about age 19).
Abstinence-Only education is the form that many Evangelicals and right-wing Republicans favor. In my opinion, that's a bunch of B.S. Kids are taught that condoms and birth control are not effective, so when teens DO have sex, they don't bother to use them.
|
|
tp
OOA Interest
Posts: 81
|
Post by tp on Sept 9, 2008 12:59:47 GMT -5
Teaching abstinence only is NEGLIGENCE at best!! In some cases, it can be considered Child Endangerment! It's a stupid (yes, that was judgemental) and ass backwards and a way to use bad religious choices to inform policy. Cam, you're the best  I agree with everything that's been said. I don't think you can truly have comprehensive sex ed without teaching abstinence and that abstinence ed doesn't cultivate a healthy sexual lifestyle. At least abstinence ed as taught today. Should the youth be taught to abstain, absolutely! Should this be the only thing they are taught? No. Given that they will have sex at some point, it's only right they are given an all encompassing education. |
|
|
|
Post by coldfront06 on Sept 9, 2008 13:19:02 GMT -5
It needs to be both. Teaching kids about condoms and birth control without telling them that its better to abstain is basically giving them the go ahead to be sexually active. When you think about it, nothing really positive can result from a teenager having sex. Thats why I LOVE Project Alpha. We teach the young boys about condoms and negative consequences of having sex...but we also make sure they know that its OK to not have sex.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 9, 2008 13:28:08 GMT -5
I think that the two should go hand in hand, but I also that there needs to be parental involvement in the seminar. I'm talking about actually having parents their with their kids.
When I was in school, we were required to have a permission slip signed by our parents to show that they approved of us receiving the training. Yay! I learned about periods and the fundamentals of sex, but after class was over, that was it.
In my experiences, the people that waited and the ones that exercise sexual maturity all had heavy parental involvement in that aspect of their lives. Even if parents are just buying condoms, it shows kids the seriousness of sex and further imparts responsibility.
Kids have sexy because they are emulating adults and trying to be grown. The more adults involved that show there are consequences and other options, the better...
|
|
tp
OOA Interest
Posts: 81
|
Post by tp on Sept 9, 2008 13:55:48 GMT -5
I think that the two should go hand in hand, but I also that there needs to be parental involvement in the seminar. I'm talking about actually having parents their with their kids. When I was in school, we were required to have a permission slip signed by our parents to show that they approved of us receiving the training. Yay! I learned about periods and the fundamentals of sex, but after class was over, that was it. In my experiences, the people that waited and the ones that exercise sexual maturity all had heavy parental involvement in that aspect of their lives. Even if parents are just buying condoms, it shows kids the seriousness of sex and further imparts responsibility. Kids have sexy because they are emulating adults and trying to be grown. The more adults involved that show there are consequences and other options, the better... Great point but the drawback here is if you are holding an interactive program, they will be much less likely to open up and ask the questions that they want to know, which in essence is what you are trying to target. For most adolescents, there is little intrinsic motivation to "learn about sex" bc they are at the age where they know it all and if they don't know, they can find out on their own. You have to keep their attention and you do that by finding out what they want to know and if parents are there, more than likely, you won't find out... |
|
|
|
Post by DSTspr98 on Sept 9, 2008 13:59:31 GMT -5
Who's the target audience? Presenting the importance of both topics will provide the biggest bang for the buck.
I pretty much share the afore mentioned reasons why each go hand in hand. If it's a younger bunch I would lean toward abstaining-pros & cons and follow up with the sex ed.... with an older audience I'd use the opposite format.
my assumption would be they're already sexually active so I'd go heavy on STD content and include the emotional side of being sexually active.
Wait...will you have breakout sessions? This will be a great seminar. Then it's interactive.... YAY! LOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 9, 2008 13:59:39 GMT -5
Great point but the drawback here is if you are holding an interactive program, they will be much less likely to open up and ask the questions that they want to know, which in essence is what you are trying to target. For most adolescents, there is little intrinsic motivation to "learn about sex" bc they are at the age where they know it all and if they don't know, they can find out on their own. You have to keep their attention and you do that by finding out what they want to know and if parents are there, more than likely, you won't find out... When you're right, your right... Maybe some sort of dual program, where in one room, you educate kids and the other parents, then at the end, bring them together. While obviously parents don't need help on how to have sex, they may on how to talk to kids about it... |
|
tp
OOA Interest
Posts: 81
|
Post by tp on Sept 9, 2008 14:03:35 GMT -5
Eager...thanks for the parental involvement idea. I am actually working on designing sex health progs and that was something I neglected to include. Thank you so much |
|
|
|
Post by CrimsonENDvy on Sept 9, 2008 14:56:33 GMT -5
Abstinence education can be very successful, but only to a point. There comes a point when hormones cloud judgement, the fear of parental wrath diminishes, and even the fear of God and godly principles is no longer a dominant force. It is so much of a stronger argument to say God says wait and abstinence is the only safe way to go, when that is combined with facts about STDs, unwanted pregnancies, emotional repercussions of being sexually active, etc... Put it this way one day when I am a parent, if I have a disobedient child I rather my child be healthy and childlessly disobedient then disobediently unhealthy (with an STD) and/or an unwanted pregnancy. Abstinence = best case scenario But if they do decide to have sex, know the facts and practice SAFER sex...because we all know that there is no SAFE sex. There is nothing wrong with teaching facts. However, I want my kids to hear it first at home. I want to be the one indoctrinating them, not a shcool system. Great point. From what I've seen, far more teenagers become sexually active early on. And if they will do it regardless, it's best to educate them on safety rather than go on the thought that they won't do it at all. Sarah Palin's daughter is a shining example of what blissful ignorance can result in. |
|
|
|
Post by CrimsonENDvy on Sept 9, 2008 15:00:36 GMT -5
Teach sex as a function of health education. Sex is a normal and necessary function of human existance and should not be hidden from students. Having said that, young people need to know about the possible negative consequences of choosing to have sex before they are mature enough to accept responsibility for their actions. Abstinence is the only way to guarantee not getting pregnant or contracting a sexually transmitted disease (rape excluded). I am for teaching abstinence, 100% but I am for teaching it responsibily. Educating young people about the function of sex is not wrong. Even educating them about contraception is acceptable as it's a way to protect our youth. Teaching abstinence only is NEGLIGENCE at best!! In some cases, it can be considered Child Endangerment! It's a stupid (yes, that was judgemental) and ass backwards and a way to use bad religious choices to inform policy. Exactly!!!!!! You hit the nail on the head. Republicans generally use the bible for health policy stances and enforcement. Not saying that's a bad thing at all, but the bible was also written in a different time. Modern changes in behavior require modern thought. Abstinence is always the best, but if you look at the fact that 63% of teenagers are sexually active by the end of high school, clearly abstinence education isn't working. |
|
|
|
Post by CrimsonENDvy on Sept 9, 2008 15:02:27 GMT -5
Abstinence and sex education can go hand-in-hand (but studies show abstinence education is generally effective in getting teens to DELAY having sex until about age 19). Abstinence-Only education is the form that many Evangelicals and right-wing Republicans favor. In my opinion, that's a bunch of B.S. Kids are taught that condoms and birth control are not effective, so when teens DO have sex, they don't bother to use them. What study were you looking at? Can you direct me to the site or the source? |
|
|
|
Post by CrimsonENDvy on Sept 9, 2008 15:03:52 GMT -5
It needs to be both. Teaching kids about condoms and birth control without telling them that its better to abstain is basically giving them the go ahead to be sexually active. When you think about it, nothing really positive can result from a teenager having sex. Thats why I LOVE Project Alpha. We teach the young boys about condoms and negative consequences of having sex...but we also make sure they know that its OK to not have sex. Hey Cold!! Is Project Alpha on you guy's national website? Any statistics to go with it as far as effectiveness? |
|
|
|
Post by CrimsonENDvy on Sept 9, 2008 15:07:38 GMT -5
Who's the target audience? Presenting the importance of both topics will provide the biggest bang for the buck. I pretty much share the afore mentioned reasons why each go hand in hand. If it's a younger bunch I would lean toward abstaining-pros & cons and follow up with the sex ed.... with an older audience I'd use the opposite format. my assumption would be they're already sexually active so I'd go heavy on STD content and include the emotional side of being sexually active. Wait...will you have breakout sessions? This will be a great seminar. Then it's interactive.... YAY! LOL. For now this presentation is solely to my peers. So it's not necessarily anything I'm doing to actually inform teens...it's more a study of the differences between the two, their outcomes, and their independent effectiveness. Maybe from this I can tweak what I find and present it to our Delta Academy. Anyway that's something altogether different... |
|
|
|
Post by DSTspr98 on Sept 9, 2008 15:43:22 GMT -5
Who's the target audience? Presenting the importance of both topics will provide the biggest bang for the buck. I pretty much share the afore mentioned reasons why each go hand in hand. If it's a younger bunch I would lean toward abstaining-pros & cons and follow up with the sex ed.... with an older audience I'd use the opposite format. my assumption would be they're already sexually active so I'd go heavy on STD content and include the emotional side of being sexually active. Wait...will you have breakout sessions? This will be a great seminar. Then it's interactive.... YAY! LOL. For now this presentation is solely to my peers. So it's not necessarily anything I'm doing to actually inform teens...it's more a study of the differences between the two, their outcomes, and their independent effectiveness. Maybe from this I can tweak what I find and present it to our Delta Academy. Anyway that's something altogether different... Excellent idea Soror! |
|
|
|
Post by pinkngreen06 on Sept 10, 2008 6:59:32 GMT -5
Teach sex as a function of health education. Sex is a normal and necessary function of human existance and should not be hidden from students. Having said that, young people need to know about the possible negative consequences of choosing to have sex before they are mature enough to accept responsibility for their actions. Abstinence is the only way to guarantee not getting pregnant or contracting a sexually transmitted disease (rape excluded). I am for teaching abstinence, 100% but I am for teaching it responsibily. Educating young people about the function of sex is not wrong. Even educating them about contraception is acceptable as it's a way to protect our youth. Teaching abstinence only is NEGLIGENCE at best!! In some cases, it can be considered Child Endangerment! It's a stupid (yes, that was judgemental) and ass backwards and a way to use bad religious choices to inform policy. ITA 100% Cam. |
|
|
|
Post by Southie on Sept 10, 2008 7:52:28 GMT -5
I agree with Cam!
Also make sure to outline the meaning of being responsible for whatever they decide. I hesitate to use the work consequences, however it needs to be addressed.
|
|
