Baker 1

(http://media.salon.com/2014/11/shutterstock_226252741.jpg)

Bananas or STDs?
A Research Paper on Sex Education in Public Schools
By: Jeremy Baker
Jan. 6, 2017

Baker 2
Statement of Topic:
The topic of this research paper is on sex education in public schools. Specifically
targeting sex education in high schools with the viewpoint that it should be taught for the benefit
of society. Theres a lot of controversy surrounding this topic on whether sex education should be
taught in schools, abstinence only education to be taught, or have the topic be left to parents to
discuss with their children. Many people argue about the stated, and dont do research to back up
their opinions. This paper will look at different statistics from within the United States and also
internationally from countries in Europe as a way to compare and contrast the styles of education
and opinions of the different populations.
Purpose:
I am researching this topic to educate people about how teaching sex education in public
schools can be a good topic and not something to look at as inappropriate or as a way to promote
sex. I aim to persuade people who are more conservative in their views of sex education that
there should be more programs teaching comprehensive sex education, instead of a curriculum
consisting only of abstinence only sex education. I believe that having comprehensive sex
education be taught in high schools will reduce the rates of STDs, unwanted teen pregnancies,
and abortions, which could help better society. Ive personally known people who have been
extremely uneducated about sexual health and contraceptives that I believe sex education should
be taught in schools to educate adolescents. This would help adolescents in all areas learn to be
smart with their decisions.
A lot of the argument on the side saying abstinence only sex education should be what is
taught in schools is based off the question: Will comprehensive sex education cause an increase

Baker 3
in teenage sexual activity?. I believe this is a completely reasonable question to be asked, but
its unreasonable that because of the fear the answer is yes, theres a block in open education
about important topics to teenagers that could really value that information. My point of view is
that if adolescents want to engage in sexual activities, theyre going to do just that. It doesnt
matter what type of education theyre given. Having comprehensive sex education will at least
give them information so that they would be able to make more informed choices and decisions
with what they do.
Scope:
This paper will be looking at different survey results that have been conducted within the
USA, Rome, and Greece. This is so that different cultural views and demographics from different
countries can be compared to the USAs methods of sex education. These surveys show what
parents, students, and educators believe should be taught within a sex education curriculum.
Research will also be displayed defining the difference between comprehensive sex education
and abstinence only education, which is more beneficial, and who should have a voice on the
debate between which is being taught. Along with the above, this paper will look at what the
current federal policies towards sex education are.
Research:
Across the United States, and internationally there are constant debates about what
should or should not be taught in public schools. A hot topic for these debates is whether sex
education should be taught in schools and, if so, what kind of sex education? The two styles of
sex education constantly being argued of which should be taught include comprehensive sex
education and abstinence-only-until-marriage sex education, most commonly referred to as

Baker 4
abstinence only education. Surveys conducted in the USA, Rome, and Italy show what different
populations believe should be taught within schools. With these, and research conducted towards
the different methods of teaching sex education, there is proof that something should be done
within the public-school curriculum to include a more comprehensive sex education. Now the
question remains, what is the difference between these two methods of sex education, and what
research behind them shows which is more effective?
Comprehensive sex education gives students a broad and multifaceted approach (Beh
and Diamond, ch.3, sec.A). Its more open towards sexuality, and aims to allow students to have
access to more applicable, important, reliable information. Even though it takes a different
approach to sex education as abstinence only does, it still includes abstinence only education
within its curriculum. Teaching the benefits of abstinence only education allows for students to
know that yes, remaining abstinent is an option and can be beneficial, but having it be within the
comprehensive sex education course they learn about other ways to be safe. Comprehensive sex
education also teaches different methods adolescents could use to prevent pregnancies and
diseases. It promotes a healthier lifestyle as well by advocating for self-responsibility, having
students examine and learn core values, and develop mutual respect between each other.
Abstinence-only-until-marriage sex education, or abstinence only education teaches that
the only effective way to protect sexual health is to abstain from sexual activity until marriage. It
teaches that sex outside of marriage makes an individual subject to becoming hurt both
physically and psychologically. This method of sex education constantly highlights the risks of
sexual activity outside of marriage, but it doesnt teach ways that these risks can be prevented
other than remaining abstinent until marriage. Abstinence only education has even been
compared to a drivers education course in which teachers show students grisly photos of traffic

Baker 5
accidents but never tell them to stop at red lights or buckle their seatbelts (Beh and Diamond,
ch.3, sec. C). Studies have shown this method of education is extremely inaccurate due to the
facts that it is very biased, rooted in religious beliefs, relies on the fears and shame of the
students, and it is very selective as to what it does teach, omitting important information in the
process.
Currently, the federal government is constantly subsidizing millions of dollars on an
annual basis towards states, community organizations, and programs that focus on teaching
abstinence only sex education. Section 510 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 states that the funds given to the states from the federal government
can be used within media campaigns, schools, and the money can be directed towards programs
that support abstinence only sex education. The Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA), another
federal program is used to promote self discipline and other prudent approaches to the problem
of adolescent premarital sexual relations (Beh and Diamond, ch.2, sec. A). These programs are
directly funded by the government for unreliable, inaccurate sex education to be taught.
Researchers have found through different surveys and statistics that comprehensive sex
education can help delay or push back the time when teenagers, adolescents, and students decide
to start engaging in sexual activities. Learning through this method also brought a rise in the use
of contraceptives with the students who had become sexually active. Internationally, there is a
growing accord that comprehensive sex education should be seen as a basic human right. It
allows for students to learn a broad overview of different options for safe sexual health, instead
of focusing on a single method, and saying that is the only method that works.
In St. Louis, Missouri, studies had revealed that teenagers ranging from 12-19 years old
had higher rates of 38x more likely to contract, spread, or already have syphilis than any other

Baker 6
group in the nation. Schools within their district teach abstinence only sex education and very
rarely have any mention about condoms or contraceptives. Studies conducted by the education
director of Planned Parenthood within St. Louis, Karen Omvig, found that there was a
correlation between the high rates of STDs and the sex education that was being taught. Other
researchers had found that the programs of comprehensive sex education that displayed specific
examples, demonstrations, and information are the most effective at lowering rates of STDs and
increasing the use of contraceptives (Reinhard, par. 11).

Information Students Want to Learn (Greece)

44%
56%

How To Prevent STDs

Interpersonal Relations

Internationally, there are

Baker 7
In 2011, the Mississippi State Universitys Social Science Research Center conducted a
survey for the parents of students asking about specific topics that could be taught, to see how
many parents were in support of that topic. The results of this survey showed that 96.3% were in
support for benefits of abstaining from sexual activity to be taught, 91.4% were supportive to
learn how to get tested for HIV, AIDS, and other STDs. 94.3% were supportive for their kids to
learn the basics of reproduction. When it came to learning about contraceptives 90.3% were
supportive for birth control methods, 82.9% for talking with the girlfriend or boyfriend about
birth control, and 82 % for learning where to obtain birth control products. 72.2% of parents

Baker 8
were supportive for classroom demonstrations on how to use a condom (Kieffer).

Parent Support of Contraceptives

28%

25%
25%

Birth Control Methods

Based off the statistics and research presented above, it is shown that comprehensive sex
education should be taught in public schools. Not only because of the research showing that its
the smarter method to use because of the information it grants to students to make informed

Baker 9
decisions when it comes to their sexual health, but also because of the parent support behind
what they believe their children should be learning.
Ethics Summary:
Sex education being taught in public schools is ethically challenging because everybody
has different opinions on what sex education should consist of, and when it should be taught. It
can also be unethical to only teach abstinence only education because it gives the student a
disadvantage in the world with all the information that had been withheld from them. Another
ethical dilemma with the teaching of sex education is that a lot of people believe that its up to
the parents of the individuals to teach them about sex and sexual health on their own time. Some
parents also get the idea that comprehensive sex education encourages and promotes sexual
activity because it could be against their religious or personal beliefs. All that comprehensive sex
education does is give an individual a much broader and educated view towards sexual health. It
doesnt, in fact, promote or encourage teenagers to go out and have sex. Due to these different
viewpoints, teaching sex education in public schools can be seen as ethically challenging.
Proposal of Action:
With the United States still having many schools being taught abstinence only education,
I propose that we start integrating comprehensive sex education programs into more school
districts across the USA. This will be done by having the President terminate the existing federal
programs funding abstinence only education and redistributing the money that would go to that,
into programs for comprehensive sex education. To actually get them integrated into the schools
we will need to have the Board of Education change the sex education curriculum and make it a
requirement to teach comprehensive sex education. With this, rates of STDs throughout the

Baker 10
United States will decrease and people will be more educated about their sexual health. Im
hoping that within 10 years of implementing new programs and sort of weeding out the
abstinence only education, we will have the majority of schools being taught comprehensive sex
education.
For the parents who absolutely do not want their children to learn comprehensive sex
education they will have an option to sign a form so their child can be released from the class
during those periods. During that time I propose the child will go to the school library or another
classroom to do other schoolwork. That way, the parents who dont want for their children to
learn comprehensive sex education whether its from personal beliefs, religious beliefs, or fears
due to stigmas around comprehensive sex education, they will have an option so theyre also able
to have a choice in the matter.

Baker 11
Works Cited
Beh, Hazel Glenn, and Milton Diamond. "The failure of abstinence-only education: minors have
a right to honest talk about sex." Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 15.1 (2006): 12+.
Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 6 Jan. 2017.

Dame, Alanna Schubach. Digital image. Salon. N.p., 30 Nov. 2014. Web. 24 Dec. 2016.

Kieffer, Chris. "Most parents support sex education in schools." Northeast Mississippi Daily
Journal (Tupelo, MS) 03 Oct. 2013: Points of View Reference Center. Web. 6 Jan. 2017.

Matziou, V., P. Perdikaris, K. Petsios, E. Gymnopoulou, P. Galanis, and H. Brokalaki. "Greek

Reinhard, Beth. "Statistics on STDs in St. Louis Spark Debate on Sex Ed." Education Week
16.37 (1997): 5. Academic Search Premier. Web. 6 Jan. 2017.