October is Let's Talk Month, a time when adults are encouraged to listen to what kids and teenagers have to say about sex and sexuality and provide the answers they really need. As wonderful as this idea is, it's not a complete cure. What's really needed is comprehensive sex education on the institutional level, whether in schools or through community-based programs. And we've got it - sort of. Despite all indications to the contrary, abstinence-only sex education continues to be official policy, and we continue to ignore the problem.
Abstinence is great. Of course sex-education classes should encourage abstinence outside of the confines of a committed relationship. Teenagers absolutely need to be told that they don't have to have sex, and it's a message they just don't get often enough. However, the simple fact remains that abstinence isn't the only way. It's not easy, it's not natural, and it's not a more valid choice than making the informed decision to have sex.
Abstinence-only sex education is handing teenagers a loaded weapon with no safety and telling them not to fire it. Even those with the best intentions will make possibly deadly mistakes. Teens will still have sex no matter what adults do, and if they're not informed, they'll do it without regard for safety. No amount of moralizing and hoping for the best will ever change that; the only thing that stands a chance is arming teenagers with the information they need to make smart choices.
This so-called education is failing even those it is designed to protect. The common assumption in programs of this type is that the participants will have sex at some point in their lives. They're training good little husbands and wives, not monks and nuns. And therein lies a big part of the problem with abstinence-only education - married people need to know about safe sex, too. Marriage doesn't magically protect you from STDs, nor does it automatically mean that you're signing up for five kids.
Not only is abstinence-only education dangerous in and of itself, but it is being conducted dangerously. In a 2004 study, the Democratic staff of the House Committee on Government Reforms found that federally funded, community-based abstinence-only programs were riddled with dangerous inaccuracies. The claims made by these programs fly in the face of medical science and common sense, claiming, among other things, that pregnancy is possible from sexual contact other than intercourse and that condoms don't prevent the transmission of STDs. An independent study by Advocates for Youth also concluded that abstinence-only sex education had "no lasting, positive impact."
So why do we keep throwing our money down the drain on programs that don't work? If you've ever read one of my columns before, you know what I'm about to say, but in case you're new here: it's the conservatives. That being said, this issue is too crucial and too eminently reparable to get bogged down in partisan name-calling. It shouldn't be a matter of politics. If Mississippi has the third-highest pregnancy rate in the nation, we should be teaching teenagers how not to get pregnant. Period.
I can't say what should be included in sex-education courses, nor can I advise at what age to start them. That's something to be left up to educators. But anyone with half a brain can see that lies and secrecy have to be left out. If we continue to ignore the problems of abstinence-only sex education, we're only going to end up harming, even killing, the next generation.
