THE BIG 'O': Sex education needs to get reality check

According to the New York Post, the season ending show of "Zoey 101" averaged 7.3 million viewers, which was more than double Nickelodeon's season average. Presumably, the increase was due to the bombshell news of 16 year-old star Jamie Lynn Spears' untimely pregnancy. The mother, Lynne Spears, sold the story to OK! Magazine for millions, but unfortunately had to indefinitely place her parenting book on hold.

First, does anything seem wrong with Lynne Spears making any more money off her dysfunctional children by trying to publish a book on parenting skills? Also, what parent would honestly take advice from a mother whose teenage daughter has recently been knocked up? Perhaps she should write a "How I Screwed Up as a Parent" memoir instead.

And let's not forget about Britney, who is a separate bag of issues.

Sadly, the entertainment industry is making a spectacle out of a common, tragic situation many teenagers encounter. In fact, the latest study conducted by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention found a 3 percent increase in pregnancies among teens. The United States has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy among Western nations despite the fact that our young adults are equally as sexually active.

Teenage pregnancy is a significant issue that is not given sufficient amount of attention at home or in the classroom. Since the Bush administration has taken office the government has spent an average of $176 million on abstinence-only programs, which have repeatedly been shown ineffective.

As reported by the Washington Post last year, a government-authorized study found that abstinence-only programs does not increase or decrease the probability of teens having sex. The 1997 Congressional study followed 2,000 elementary and middle school children through high school in both rural and urban communities, with slightly over half the children receiving abstinence-only education. In the end, the study found that by the age of 17 half of the teens had been sexually active; however, less than a quarter of the sexually active teenagers reported using a contraceptive.

Obviously this large-scale study only solidifies what many health professionals already know: abstinence-only programs are ineffective. It is unrealistic to assume that teenagers are going to simply wait to have sex until marriage. Why should the government be spending millions of dollars each year on a program continuously shown unsuccessful? In all reality, abstinence-only education within schools should be replaced by a comprehensive sex education curriculum.

A comprehensive sex education program provides students with the knowledge of how to adopt safe sex practices if they make they choose to have sex. The program does not ignore abstinence or encourage teens to have sex, but rather provides a realistic alternative many young adults need. In other words, comprehensive sex education maintains that abstinence is the only proven method of avoiding sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancies, yet if you're going to have sex there are many contraceptives available.

Teenagers don't use contraceptives because there is a lack of education surrounding the issue. The religious right, which only one group who vehemently support abstinence-only education, has created an illusion that comprehensive sex education only teaches students how to have safe sex while ignoring the merits of abstinence. This notion is detrimental and simply false.

America needs to rethink its sex education curriculum in order to curtail the increase of teenage pregnancies, which ultimately create challenging economic and emotional circumstances. Taken as a whole, teenagers deserve a reasonable and practical sex education program that accommodates the realities of young adulthood.

Maybe if the country's health education curriculum weren't living in the Dark Ages, there would be fewer Jamie Lynn's running around.

Write to Travis at tjoneill@bsu.edu


More from The Daily




Sponsored Stories



Loading Recent Classifieds...