The Sex Ed Challenge

Abstinence. The word simply means voluntary restraint from something that you want. Most frequently, it refers to food, sexual intercourse, or alcohol. In Utah schools, it almost exclusively refers to intercourse. In fact, mounting evidence shows that, for most Utah kids, it’s the only method of birth control or STD prevention they know.

(I’m going to go on a rant here. Sorry about that. But before I do, let me make sure to reinforce that I promote abstinence as a responsible sexual choice for teens. My concern is Utah’s prejudice against minimum education standards on how to prevent disease and pregancy for non-abstinent teens.)

According to an editorial in the Salt Lake Tribune, the University of Utah performed a study indicating that STDs among 15-to-24-year-olds in Utah was rising at an alarming rate from 2001-2005… the fastest in the nation. In my opinion, the moralizing masses would be quick to rationalize this away as the result a degenerate nation with too-permissive attitudes towards sex.

They have it backwards. I lay blame for this modern-day Utah sexual epidemic squarely at the feet of those advocating abstinence education. Public policy based upon religious doctrine causes youth to be poorly informed about their sexual health and reproductive choices.

You see, in Utah, it’s illegal to teach a child the basics about healthy sexual relationships in public school:

…the materials adopted by a local school board must prohibit instruction in: the intricacies of intercourse, sexual stimulation, or erotic behavior; the advocacy of homosexuality; the advocacy or encouragement of the use of contraceptive methods or devices; or the advocacy of sexual activity outside of marriage. —Utah State Code

Of course, abstinence-only promoters point out that individual schools and teachers are allowed to deviate from this standard. They will fail to mention, however, that any curriculum deviating from the standard is required to come under district review. Once under review, if that curriculum doesn’t meet the requirement above, the district’s funding will be reduced. Yep, this includes Title 1 money, the teat at which virtually all school districts suckle to provide a minimum education in many areas.

In other words, if you somehow manage to find a responsible, ethical teacher to agree to provide thorough sex education for your children in public school, you are endangering the funding of your entire district. No wonder they won’t do it.

The problem with this approach is that you have to talk about specific sexual practices in order to discuss how to be safe with them. For instance, in Utah, anal and oral sex are very popular because teens mistakenly believe they are preserving their “virginity” by not having vaginal sex. In particular, anal sex without a condom results in a much higher STD and secondary infection rate than most other practices. And combining the two practices in the wrong order can cause severe illness.

Why aren’t teachers allowed to tell kids this basic fact in public school? Right, because it’s illegal, and discussing specific sexual practices is against the law.

Abstinence propaganda proudly ignores the facts and advocates abstinence as the only effective method of preventing physical and emotional consequences of premarital sex. Yeah. Go figure. Don’t have sex, and you won’t get pregnant or get STDs. OK, everybody gets that.

Don’t get me started on how statistics show that abstinence-only sex education actually results in more teen pregnancy than no public sex education at all. I’ll just get angry at my bone-headed legislators. You don’t want to see me angry.

The fact is, only 1 out of 5 kids have not had some form of sexual intercourse by the age of 19. Hooray for them, that’s the most effective method of preventing the problem. Now let’s address the issue for the remaining four out of five teens, huh?

Where to affix the blame for this unfortunate policy? Ultimately, it rests with the voters, the vast majority of whom are religiously conservative. Utah shares, with its conservative brother Texas, the repugnant stain of having made reasonable sex education illegal. Almost universally, this notion is justified by saying that education in the mechanics of sex will make children more “curious” about it, resulting in greater sexual activity among those not yet married, and more participation in riskier practices that they may not have been aware of prior to the education.

Too bad that line of reasoning is complete B.S.

I’ll single-out the quotes most relevant to Utah, since those are the ones I’m most familiar with. These plainly illustrate how Utah public policy has been brought into line with mainstream religious teachings in the state:

One need not, of course, read statistics to recognize a moral decay…The endless sex and violence on network TV, the trash of so many motion pictures, the magnified sensuality found in much of modern literature, the emphasis on sex education, a widespread breakdown of law and order—all are manifestations of this decay. — Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, November 1993

Talk to [your children] plainly about sex and the teaching of the gospel regarding chastity. Let this information come from parents in the home in an appropriate way. — M. Russel Ballard, “Like A Flame Unquenchable”

(Note how carefully he says “Let this information come from parents in the home”. I was there for this General Conference talk, and the way he stressed the sentence and the context of the talk clearly indicated he meant that sex education should only take place at home… not public school.)

Where schools have undertaken sex education courses and programs, the Church believes the materials used should advocate abstinence from sex before marriage and should teach correct principles that will produce long-term happiness. Thus, the Church believes that public education should in no way promote or encourage sexual promiscuity, a lifestyle that is unhealthy, immoral, and fraught with potentially serious consequences. — Darlene Chidester Hutchison (not a leader, but a good summary of policy and current attitudes), “Mormon Sex Education”

Now that the pundits have had their say, let’s have a science quote from the American Psychological Association:

Based on over 15 years of research, the evidence shows that comprehensive sexuality education programs for youth that encourage abstinence, promote appropriate condom use, and teach sexual communication skills reduce HIV-risk behavior and also delay the onset of sexual intercourse.

Reasonable sex education, including specifics on the mechanics of particular sexual practices, promotion of abstinence, and instruction on how to use condoms delays teens’ first voluntary sexual experience and prevents STDs. Reasonable sex education does not promote promiscuity; far from it, it delays it if it’s going to happen.

This myopic focus on abstinence-only education is hurting Utah, giving rise to a new generation of teens who not only are woefully uninformed about sex, but also are spreading infectious diseases faster than anywhere else in the nation.

At issue, though, is public awareness of the facts, and willingness to acknowledge the evidence despite the reassurances of authority figures and popular notions to the contrary. For various reasons, I don’t see that as very likely in Utah. Very few times have Utah voters been willing to go against the advice of their religious leaders, and those times only when it’s obvious the opinions of those leaders are divided on the issue.

But there is hope. Outside of Utah and Texas, detailed sex education is available in public schools, and has left abstinence-only education in the dust as far as promoting public health and reducing teen pregnancy. One day, maybe, my state will wake up from its collective denial to realize that teens have been having sex as long as there have been teens, and it’s our responsibility to manage this situation responsibly, not plug our ears, close our eyes, and sing “nyah nyah, I can’t hear you!” any longer.