|
666
Type
sex education into the search engine.
http://www.scarleteen.com/
http://www.avert.org/sexedu.htm
Compare
the approaches in the above two web sites.
http://www.bigeye.com/sexeducation/
Paragraph
Template
Georgia
12 Point
22
12 0
0
12
(like
the 100,000,000 currently being spent by
the U.S. government on sexual abstinence programs that prohibit
teachers for providing any other advice or information) may ease the conscience
but they do not solve the problem. There is no evidence available to
indicate that these programs are effective.
http://www.ppnyc.org/facts/facts/federal_policy.html
young
people need skills and information to help them delay sexual activity and to
protect themselves when they do become sexually active. Without this knowledge,
young people are at greater risk for unintended pregnancy and sexually
transmitted diseases (STDs).
Models of Sex Education
There are two opposing models of sex education. Abstinence-only-until-marriage education teaches that abstinence is the only morally correct option of sexual expression for unmarried people and censors information about contraception and condoms for the prevention of unintended pregnancy and STDs. Comprehensive sex education is age- and developmentally appropriate education that includes a variety of topics related to human development, relationships, personal skills, sexual behavior, sexual health, and society and culture. It teaches that abstinence is the best method for avoiding STDs and unintended pregnancy, but also provides information about condoms and contraception.
Scientific and Public Support for a Comprehensive Model
Studies show that teaching both abstinence and contraception is the most effective approach.1 Young people who receive this type of education are more likely to delay sexual activity and to use protection correctly and consistently when they do become sexually active. In contrast, there is no evidence that abstinence-only programs are effective. More than 120 national organizations -- such as the American Medical Association -- former Surgeon General David Satcher, and the majority of Americans support comprehensive sex education.
Despite the evidence and opinion in support of comprehensive sex education, the federal government has adopted the abstinence-only model as its sex education policy, and in fact has dramatically increased the resources devoted to such programs over the last several years.
There are currently three federal programs that support abstinence-only education.2 The first, the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA), was established in 1981 to fund programs designed to prevent teenage pregnancy by teaching abstinence as the only option for teenagers. In 1996, funding was dramatically expanded; the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) allocated $250 million over five years to the states for abstinence-only programs and required states to contribute three dollars for every four dollars of federal money. In order to receive these funds, programs must have the "exclusive purpose" of teaching the benefits of abstinence and must conform with the rest of the eight-point definition of abstinence education outlined in the law (see box). States may directly administer the programs themselves, or they can award grants to various agencies, including non-profit, private, faith-based, or public agencies. While some states have interpreted the definition narrowly, funding programs that adhere closely to the eight points, others have been more flexible, funding programs that include tutoring, career counseling, and community service.
In an effort by abstinence-only advocates to limit program flexibility, a third, more restrictive abstinence-only program was established in October 2000 -- Special Programs of Regional and National Significance-Community Based Abstinence Education (SPRANS-CBAE). The federal government awards SPRANS-CBAE funding directly to programs, rather than to states, so that the federal government can decide which programs receive funding and can prevent a loose interpretation of the eight points by the states. In fact, SPRANS-CBAE programs must address each of the eight points.
-----------------------------------------------------
sexuality
education which denies young people the information they need to protect their
health and their lives,"
abstinence
education say the programs waste money because they are ineffective and, worse,
they deprive sexually active teens of potentially life-saving information.
Conservatives,
however, argue that abstinence is the only sure way to prevent sexually
transmitted diseases and pregnancy.
Federal Definition
of Abstinence Education**
a.
Has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;
b.
Teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
c.
Teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
d.
Teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;
e.
Teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects;
f.
Teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child's parents, and society;
g.
Teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances; and
h.
Teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.
**
Source: Title IX, Section 912 of the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ppnyc.org/facts/facts/federal_policy.htmlFederal
Funding and Proposed Increases
A total of $137 million in federal funds was appropriated for
abstinence-only programs in fiscal year 2004 -- $12 million through AFLA, $50
million through PWORA, and $75 million through SPRANS. Despite no
evidence that abstinence-only programs are effective, the president’s
requested budget for 2005 seeks to double funding for these programs to a
remarkable $273 million. Since 1996, Congress has committed $899 million in
federal and state funding for abstinence-only programs. If the president's 2005
budget request is fulfilled, government funding of
abstinence-only-until-marriage programs will top more that one billion
dollars.
A Policy Alternative: The Family Life
Education Act
To counter the expansion of federal funding for abstinence-only
programs, proponents of comprehensive sex education are supporting the Family
Life Education Act (H.R.4182). This bill would provide $100 million in annual
federal funding to the states to support sex education programs that include
age-appropriate and medically accurate information about both abstinence and
contraception. Because this legislation would channel federal funds to programs
that use a comprehensive sex education model, it would help eliminate the
contradiction between what the evidence shows is effective and what federal
policies currently support. Such programs have the greatest potential for making
a difference in the lives and health of young people.
|
W.