Keiara Jordan

Coach Cozby
ENG 1301.P32
Analysis & Synthesis Essay
10 November 2017

Sex education: Abstinence-Only vs Comprehensive

The United States seems to have always have the highest rates of certain controversial

issues within the society. The great nation leads the world in obesity, crime, divorce, teen

pregnancy, and government debt, but in particular, teen pregnancy has become the ordinary in

this day and age. Adolescents are engaging in sexual activity at a younger age, between middle

and high school, and with multiple partners. This is causing the rates of pregnancy in

adolescence and infectious sexual diseases to rise since the year. The two alternative programs,

Abstinence-Only and Comprehensive Sex Education, both concur that they may have an effect

on the rate of teenage pregnancy and their course of study promotes safe sex and moral values.

While they have these values in common, the opinion on how the education is presented to

younger generations differs drastically; especially when it depends on which is making the

greatest impact on the decline.

Sex can wait has been the common expression among all abstinence education

programs. The sole purpose of these programs is to reduce the rate of early sexual activity,

decrease teen pregnancy, and prevent sexually transmitted diseases and infections. Christine Kim

and Robert Rectors article Abstinence Education Programs Are Effective argues how

abstinence-only education programs are able to encourage marital commitment, avoid premarital

sex, and teach personal responsibility. The article provides data from research to support their

claims of how teen sexual activity is a problem and that the abstinence-only education

curriculum is the most effective educational institution. Although they discuss the many studies

done to assess the curriculum's impact on teens sexual activity rates, they include the change in
Keiara Jordan
Coach Cozby
ENG 1301.P32
Analysis & Synthesis Essay
10 November 2017
percentages in some points but not in others. For instance, they included a two-year study at a

program in and found that youths that participated in the program exhibited reduced levels of

recent sexual activity compared with non-participants but they neglect to incorporate

percentages to back up the claim. According to the authors, abstinence is the surest way to

avoid the risk of STDs and unwed childbearing, this ideology of celibacy not only would

decrease the rate of teen pregnancy, but also retain the standard morals of society. These

programs are adamant that teens who engage in early sex are more likely to be at an increased

risk of [STDs], reduced psychological and emotional well-being, lower academic achievement,

teen pregnancy, and out-of-wedlock childbearing (Kim, Rector). The authors realise that the

underlying question is: does the program work? Evidently abstinence-only programs surmise that

if teens are avoiding premarital sex, there would not be any problem with teen pregnancy or

STD/STI rates. Yet, this side of sex education also acknowledges the alternative interventions

and evaluated that neither program delayed or reduced teen sexual activity (Kim, Rector).

The concerns in the article Abstinence Education Programs Are Not Effective against

abstinence-only education revolves around one main concept: they are not realistic. American

culture has evolved and changed in ways that may seem morally reprehensible to some, but

conventional to others. Nowadays, sex is a norm before marriage as teens are having sex [at]

age seventeen but do not marry until their middle or late twenties [...] (Abstinence Education

Programs Are Not Effective) and comprehensive sex education programs feel that it is not

accurate to teach young people that all adults adhere to [this ideal]. Marriage is no longer a

main priority at the start of a relationship and although abstinence-only education programs feel

marriage should be the most important consideration, comprehensive sex education allege that

knowledge about sex and contraceptives has substantial effect on youths. Although it is being
Keiara Jordan
Coach Cozby
ENG 1301.P32
Analysis & Synthesis Essay
10 November 2017
taught in the curriculum of abstinence-only education that marriage is an ethical belief, the

values of this religious belief is not appropriate in a public school setting (McCammon).

Furthermore, the statistics provided in McCammons article are there to support her belief that

abstinence-only programs do not inform teens, but rather use fear methods [and] scientifically

questionable and withhold public health and life saving information (Abstinence Education

Programs Are Not Effective). Abstinence-only education programs have been funded millions of

dollars by the federal government and the article specifically focuses on this point with

hyperlinks to convey that the data included shows there has not been any significant increase in

the decline. In previous years, they were created to keep the tradition of reducing unwed

childbearing [...], but the money being spent on these programs, despite the ineffectiveness of

their research, is requiring them to teach a mutually faithful monogamous relationship

therefore, it shows that their ideal objective is to have teens marry before engaging in sexual

activity and advocate better moral principles.

These two opposing arguments are similar in their concerns about pregnancy in

adolescence and their intentions to lower teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and

infection rates. However, they diverge at the question of: what is the solution? Both articles use

data percentages to present a logos rhetoric appeal to their audience and agree that adolescent's

future is the main concern. Yet, their definition of what sex education is and what the curriculum

should consist of is their underlying disparity. Abstinence-only education programs believe that

if teens avoid having premarital sex and are encouraged to engage in abstinence, the rates of teen

pregnancies and STDs will diminish. On the other hand, comprehensive sex education programs

prefer to encourage the use of contraceptives, support informative knowledge about sex and how

to avoid the risk of STDs, rather than shun adolescents for taking part in early sexual activity.
Keiara Jordan
Coach Cozby
ENG 1301.P32
Analysis & Synthesis Essay
10 November 2017
Sex education programs sole purpose is to prevent teen pregnancy and the spread of

STDs and STIs. These two alternative programs have the same goals in mind decrease teen

pregnancy and STD/STI rates. They use data to compare one anothers impact on the decline

rates, promote federal funding, and encourage safe sex, all the while coercing their own

arguments about which is more effective. Nevertheless, they disagree on how much knowledge

should be given to adolescents to make a significant change and questioning the solution is what

drives them apart.