In my first sexual education course in seventh grade, topics including periods, birth control, sexual orientation were missing or glossed over in the curriculum. Initially, I shrugged it off and assumed we would cover issues in my high school sex-ed course.
But in freshman year, those same topics were overlooked in lieu of conversations about safe sex practices, the various forms of sexually transmitted diseases, and the benefits of abstinence — all issues important to understanding the basics of the curriculum. Yet, to the detriment of my class, we discussed these topics with a very general and heteronormative lens.
Comprehensive sexual education is vital to students worldwide, and along with limiting teen pregnancies and the spread of STDs, it can provide students with myriad other social and health-related benefits. According to a National Association of School Nurses study, “Evidence-based sexual health education can improve academic success; prevent dating violence and bullying; help youth develop healthier relationships; (...) and reduce sexual health disparities among LGBTQ youth.” As a result, school health care programs covering sex education should be accessible to all students, and educators should teach the curriculum with the students’ best interests in mind.
While teenage pregnancies are on a downward trend as birth control becomes increasingly accessible, the rate of STDs continues to skyrocket. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, reported STDs reached an all-time high for the sixth year in a row in 2021. Young people ages 15-24 make up a shocking percentage of these cases, highlighting the importance of providing youth with comprehensive sex education to prevent STDs cases from continuing to increase.
Recommended for you
Although proper sex education is essential to all students, teaching requirements for these courses vary regionally. For instance, states like Arizona and Texas have optional sex education and stress an abstinence-only approach. Comparatively, California has relatively strong sex education requirements for a course to be taught at least once in middle and high school under the state’s Assembly Bill 329. While California’s approach to sex education requirements is more beneficial to students, it remains up to school districts and corresponding school boards to determine which curriculum to teach students.
Since the curriculum is left up to individual districts, typical sex education courses tend to exclude LGBTQ+ issues and deprive students of the inclusive education they need. A recent report from Unite for Reproductive and Gender Equity found that few students have access to LGBTQ-inclusive sex education. Teachers also consistently fail to cover topics of sexual identity and safe sex practices for LGBTQ+ youth, which can damage their mental and physical health in the long run.
According to Planned Parenthood, youth in the LGBTQ+ community are more likely to experience dating violence and teenage pregnancies. School-mandated sex education serves as a resource for information about sexual health, but it cannot be effective if it overlooks a significant portion of the student body. When a health-based curriculum assumes that its audience is heterosexual and cisgender, it ignores the experiences unique to LGBTQ+ youth.
As a result of limited sex education, many students feel inclined to seek out information from their peers or the internet. In both instances, they may be exposed to inaccurate information that would be better answered under the guidance of a professional sex education teacher.
Ultimately, comprehensive sex education serves as a tool to provide students with vital information, and its lack of inclusivity continues to harm youth seeking the resources they need.
Isabelle Nunes is a senior at Carlmont High School in Belmont. Student News appears in the weekend edition. You can email Student News at news@smdailyjournal.com.
We really need school choice, particularly on this subject. Not long ago the basic rule was keep your pants on until you are ready. My school had ten rules. the only one I remember was "she might get pregnant."
It’s amusing that we get this op-ed on the same day we have a “Standardized test scores in California fell during year in distance learning” article. It appears expanding sex education classes should be the least of worries for the public education system since they can’t teach students to pass standardized subjects. Perhaps those who don’t get their fill of gender issue discussions in a sex education class can attend an optional gender studies class for, well, gender issues.
It seems to me that the more information is provided the more unwanted pregnancies and STDs occur. Now we are also pressed into believing that the transgender and same sex crowd need further counseling. What happened to decency and morality? She seems to believe that sexual relations without any repercussions are a constitutional right and she playing the usual victim card. Heaven help us if she represents the next generation.
Hmmm... well, your comment is not unexpected. It's another what I like to call a "drive-by" remark that really does not advance the conversation. Dirk questions why can't we have "decency and morality" as part of the larger discussion. Do you have a position on his question? Are decency and morality truly missing? Should they... in your opinion... be part of the discussion? If so, how should they be part of of the discussion?
Or... you can just say Dirk is a victim of archaic thinking and that he is a grumpy old man.
Circling back... I feel Isabelle has provided everyone with an opportunity to examine an important topic. Before COVID, it seemed like most of the student commentary in the DJ was focused on how difficult it is for high school students to deal with the stress of getting into their dream school after graduation. As an aside... I was surprised that those columns from the not too distant past did not lay the cause of their anxiety squarely where it belongs... at the feet of parents, colleges and the standardized testing industry. Now, refreshingly, local students are sharing their thoughts on how the pandemic has affected their lives as they continue to grapple with the question facing graduating high school seniors... "What's next?"
But I digress...
Isabelle is speaking to what she believes is a wholly inadequate treatment of sex education in our high schools. There's a strong suggestion in her writing that sex education is not presented very well. Maybe. But citing a nursing association, the CDC, and organizations with political agendas does not lend weight to her position. Is the Sequoia Union High School District really failing to provide solid human sexuality education? If so, what are they doing or not doing that needs to be addressed? Specifics, please...
All this being said... I'm confident you, me, Dirk and Isabelle can agree that relevant and comprehensive sex education is needed. I don;t have all the answers... no one does. But here's an 8 minute Ted Talk video that may help us "shift the paradigm" on sex education for young people... https://www.ted.com/talks/al_vernacchio_sex_needs_a_new_metaphor_here_s_one?language=en
Good morning and thanks for the detailed comment on the subject. You covered a lot of things I would have liked to but don't have the time today.
I would like to reinforce and chime in on the ..."cause of their anxiety..."comment. In almost every community that has high ratings for schools, student test scores etc. the parents are involved with the school activities, curriculum and their own children's education. They care and take an active part in the entire process.
Yes... not fair to say all parents caused the angst heaped on teens as those teens start to explore post-secondary education options. Some parents do exactly as you described... they get involved in their son or daughter's education in a positive way... but there are others who push their kids to get into top rated schools. Getting into a top schools cannot be the only option. So, when the thin envelope arrives with that top college's "Thanks for playing... " letter inside, the applicant can way too easily feel like he or she has failed. They haven't.
Then, you've got colleges pushing entrance requirements into the stratosphere. There is no way they can seriously consider all the high school students who apply. It's a rigged game. When you add to the ever higher hoops to jump through with rising tuition... and the feds backing the student loans to pay those tuition increases... it's a total scam. Yet, a handful of parents who paid to play got charged and sent to prison for trying to get their kids into some top schools. Who are the real crooks?
Don;t even get me started on the College Board testing service.
As I said earlier, the young journalists who contribute to these pages rarely mentioned the role of (some) parents, colleges and the testing services who helped create the stress and anxiety they suffered as juniors and seniors in high school.
C'mon man. More information causes unwanted pregnancies and STDs. Can you give us some sources of where you got the information that gave you that idea? The next thing you might tell us is that holding an aspirin between their legs is an effective and economical form of birth control for women like Foster Friess said about 10 years ago.
Please address your "archaic thinking" comment to Dirk.
Intuitively, we all probably agree there are benefits to providing solid sex education instruction to our youth. I don't see anyone disagreeing with that idea... it's not a left or right of aisle issue. And I think we will all agree that more information has been made available to teens over the past few decades. The good news? The overall teen pregnancy rate dropped 50% from 2008 to 2018 (Pew Research). However, the teen pregnancy rate for Hispanic and African-American teens is double the rate of white teens. Are those communities getting less information? I don't know. What is true is that a lot of those kids grow up in poorer communities with less access to medical care.
Next, although adolescents make up only about a quarter of sexually active persons, they account for about half of the STI cases annually in the US (CDC). STI rates are higher for Hispanic and African-American adolescents when compared to white adolescents. Are those communities getting less information? Again, I don't know, but a lot of those kids grow up in poorer communities with less access to medical care.
So, there is a lot of information out there for kids, and while teen pregnancy rates have dropped, STI rates are surging... but there is a huge asterisk next to that statement. Even with more information out there than has been traditionally available, under resourced communities are trending the wrong direction.
Nowhere in this thread have I said more information leads to unwanted results. Please address your "archaic thinking" comment to Dirk.
I wrote earlier... "Dirk questions why can't we have 'decency and morality' as part of the larger discussion. Do you have a position on his question? Are decency and morality truly missing? Should they... in your opinion... be part of the discussion? If so, how should they be part of of the discussion?"
Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter?
Taffy - read between the lines. My point is that when there was little or no sex education at school and the information came from parents and other adults, the youth had fewer unwanted pregnancies and STDs. Not that these did not occur but there seemed to far fewer cases. As others have said, parents played a larger role in establishing a moral compass until the school systems decided it needed to get involved. And for Tommy, I may be archaic but my thinking is shared by many who are still frowning on the "let your hair down crowd" and are reticent to let the liberal school system indoctrinate their children.
I am not disagreeing with the fact that parents should have a more active role but I disagree with the idea that the schools decided to take over. I think a lot of parents decided to "let the schools do it" so they didn't have to. As for "seemed" like far fewer I think that is because there was no social media and a camera in every pocket. Another reason was people may have been "aware" of something but they didn't talk much about it. Sort of like an unwritten rule or like what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. When "Suzie" took a long family vacation it was to seek treatment for her "condition".
You, Dirk and I agree that parents should take an active role in their children's education, and that includes sex education. But when you write that you, "disagree with the idea that the schools decided to take over... " Vrrrrip! Social engineering is rampant in our schools. I will send you some examples off line... you'll be amazed.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(17) comments
We really need school choice, particularly on this subject. Not long ago the basic rule was keep your pants on until you are ready. My school had ten rules. the only one I remember was "she might get pregnant."
It’s amusing that we get this op-ed on the same day we have a “Standardized test scores in California fell during year in distance learning” article. It appears expanding sex education classes should be the least of worries for the public education system since they can’t teach students to pass standardized subjects. Perhaps those who don’t get their fill of gender issue discussions in a sex education class can attend an optional gender studies class for, well, gender issues.
It seems to me that the more information is provided the more unwanted pregnancies and STDs occur. Now we are also pressed into believing that the transgender and same sex crowd need further counseling. What happened to decency and morality? She seems to believe that sexual relations without any repercussions are a constitutional right and she playing the usual victim card. Heaven help us if she represents the next generation.
What archaic thinking from a grumpy old man.
Happy New Year... ALL year, Tommy
Hmmm... well, your comment is not unexpected. It's another what I like to call a "drive-by" remark that really does not advance the conversation. Dirk questions why can't we have "decency and morality" as part of the larger discussion. Do you have a position on his question? Are decency and morality truly missing? Should they... in your opinion... be part of the discussion? If so, how should they be part of of the discussion?
Or... you can just say Dirk is a victim of archaic thinking and that he is a grumpy old man.
Circling back... I feel Isabelle has provided everyone with an opportunity to examine an important topic. Before COVID, it seemed like most of the student commentary in the DJ was focused on how difficult it is for high school students to deal with the stress of getting into their dream school after graduation. As an aside... I was surprised that those columns from the not too distant past did not lay the cause of their anxiety squarely where it belongs... at the feet of parents, colleges and the standardized testing industry. Now, refreshingly, local students are sharing their thoughts on how the pandemic has affected their lives as they continue to grapple with the question facing graduating high school seniors... "What's next?"
But I digress...
Isabelle is speaking to what she believes is a wholly inadequate treatment of sex education in our high schools. There's a strong suggestion in her writing that sex education is not presented very well. Maybe. But citing a nursing association, the CDC, and organizations with political agendas does not lend weight to her position. Is the Sequoia Union High School District really failing to provide solid human sexuality education? If so, what are they doing or not doing that needs to be addressed? Specifics, please...
All this being said... I'm confident you, me, Dirk and Isabelle can agree that relevant and comprehensive sex education is needed. I don;t have all the answers... no one does. But here's an 8 minute Ted Talk video that may help us "shift the paradigm" on sex education for young people... https://www.ted.com/talks/al_vernacchio_sex_needs_a_new_metaphor_here_s_one?language=en
Ray,
Good morning and thanks for the detailed comment on the subject. You covered a lot of things I would have liked to but don't have the time today.
I would like to reinforce and chime in on the ..."cause of their anxiety..."comment. In almost every community that has high ratings for schools, student test scores etc. the parents are involved with the school activities, curriculum and their own children's education. They care and take an active part in the entire process.
Thank you Ray. Tommy is usually quite articulate and has expressed his expertise professionally. His comment is not his finest and I will forgive him.
It IS archaic thinking, Ray. Access to information and services does NOT lead to increases in sexual activity, STD's, etc.
Tafhdyd...
Yes... not fair to say all parents caused the angst heaped on teens as those teens start to explore post-secondary education options. Some parents do exactly as you described... they get involved in their son or daughter's education in a positive way... but there are others who push their kids to get into top rated schools. Getting into a top schools cannot be the only option. So, when the thin envelope arrives with that top college's "Thanks for playing... " letter inside, the applicant can way too easily feel like he or she has failed. They haven't.
Then, you've got colleges pushing entrance requirements into the stratosphere. There is no way they can seriously consider all the high school students who apply. It's a rigged game. When you add to the ever higher hoops to jump through with rising tuition... and the feds backing the student loans to pay those tuition increases... it's a total scam. Yet, a handful of parents who paid to play got charged and sent to prison for trying to get their kids into some top schools. Who are the real crooks?
Don;t even get me started on the College Board testing service.
As I said earlier, the young journalists who contribute to these pages rarely mentioned the role of (some) parents, colleges and the testing services who helped create the stress and anxiety they suffered as juniors and seniors in high school.
Dirk
Wow! What a great way to start the year... your collegial response to Tommy is inspiring. Good for you. We can disagree without being disagreeable.
Happy New Year... ALL year!
Dirk,
C'mon man. More information causes unwanted pregnancies and STDs. Can you give us some sources of where you got the information that gave you that idea? The next thing you might tell us is that holding an aspirin between their legs is an effective and economical form of birth control for women like Foster Friess said about 10 years ago.
As I said--archaic thinking.
Tommy, Tommy... slow down.
Please address your "archaic thinking" comment to Dirk.
Intuitively, we all probably agree there are benefits to providing solid sex education instruction to our youth. I don't see anyone disagreeing with that idea... it's not a left or right of aisle issue. And I think we will all agree that more information has been made available to teens over the past few decades. The good news? The overall teen pregnancy rate dropped 50% from 2008 to 2018 (Pew Research). However, the teen pregnancy rate for Hispanic and African-American teens is double the rate of white teens. Are those communities getting less information? I don't know. What is true is that a lot of those kids grow up in poorer communities with less access to medical care.
Next, although adolescents make up only about a quarter of sexually active persons, they account for about half of the STI cases annually in the US (CDC). STI rates are higher for Hispanic and African-American adolescents when compared to white adolescents. Are those communities getting less information? Again, I don't know, but a lot of those kids grow up in poorer communities with less access to medical care.
So, there is a lot of information out there for kids, and while teen pregnancy rates have dropped, STI rates are surging... but there is a huge asterisk next to that statement. Even with more information out there than has been traditionally available, under resourced communities are trending the wrong direction.
Nowhere in this thread have I said more information leads to unwanted results. Please address your "archaic thinking" comment to Dirk.
Tommy... one more thing.
I wrote earlier... "Dirk questions why can't we have 'decency and morality' as part of the larger discussion. Do you have a position on his question? Are decency and morality truly missing? Should they... in your opinion... be part of the discussion? If so, how should they be part of of the discussion?"
Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter?
Taffy - read between the lines. My point is that when there was little or no sex education at school and the information came from parents and other adults, the youth had fewer unwanted pregnancies and STDs. Not that these did not occur but there seemed to far fewer cases. As others have said, parents played a larger role in establishing a moral compass until the school systems decided it needed to get involved. And for Tommy, I may be archaic but my thinking is shared by many who are still frowning on the "let your hair down crowd" and are reticent to let the liberal school system indoctrinate their children.
Dirk,
I am not disagreeing with the fact that parents should have a more active role but I disagree with the idea that the schools decided to take over. I think a lot of parents decided to "let the schools do it" so they didn't have to. As for "seemed" like far fewer I think that is because there was no social media and a camera in every pocket. Another reason was people may have been "aware" of something but they didn't talk much about it. Sort of like an unwritten rule or like what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. When "Suzie" took a long family vacation it was to seek treatment for her "condition".
Tafhdyd
You, Dirk and I agree that parents should take an active role in their children's education, and that includes sex education. But when you write that you, "disagree with the idea that the schools decided to take over... " Vrrrrip! Social engineering is rampant in our schools. I will send you some examples off line... you'll be amazed.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.