JLO 220 Assignment 2 Position Paper

Comprehensive Sex Education vs.
Abstine
JLO 220
9/20/2024
Mrs.Madira Matjeni
Rivaldo DE KOCK U21632465
Introduction
Sex education is essential to teenage development and has a direct impact on public
health, especially when it comes to addressing the enduring problems of teenage
pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. Abstinence-Only Programs and
Comprehensive Sex Education are the two primary sex education strategies. While
AOP encourages abstinence until marriage as the major, and occasionally the only, way
of preventing sexual health concerns, CSE offers a comprehensive curriculum that
covers issues such as consent, contraception, STI prevention, and healthy
relationships.
This paper contends that Comprehensive Sex Education is far more effective than
Abstinence-Only Programs in curbing teen pregnancies and STIs. CSE takes a more
practical and inclusive approach, equipping adolescents with the necessary knowledge
and tools to make responsible, informed choices about their sexual health. The
argument will be backed by research that underscores the advantages of CSE and the
shortcomings of AOP. The paper will first outline evidence supporting CSE’s success,
then critically examine AOP, and finally highlight why CSE is essential for addressing
public health issues in teenagers.
Argument for Your Position

by comprehensive and scientifically supported approach to sexual health,
Comprehensive Sex Education equips teenagers with the critical knowledge they need
to make safe and responsible decisions. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that
CSE outperforms Abstinence-Only Programs in reducing the prevalence of adolescent
pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. The fact that CSE offers precise,
research-based teaching on contraception, STDs, and sexual behaviour is a major
contributing factor in this. In contrast to AOP, which frequently omits important
information on contraception, CSE makes sure that teenagers are aware of the best
ways to avoid getting pregnant and stay healthy.
According to research from the Guttmacher Institute, CSE helps teenagers postpone
having sex and dramatically reduces the likelihood of teenage pregnancies. CSE
provides youth with the knowledge and skills necessary to protect themselves should
they decide to engage in sexual activity by teaching them about safe sex practices and
contraception. Conversely, AOP does not provide this useful information, which leads to
increased rates of unprotected sex among teenagers who do have sex. Research also
show that youth who take part in CSE are less likely to indulge in hazardous sexual
behaviours and more likely to utilise contraception than teens who receive education
just on abstinence.
The emphasis that Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) places on educating
teenagers how to form wholesome relationships, communicate clearly, and comprehend
permission is another significant advantage. Beyond only preventing STIs and
pregnancies, these elements also support a more all-encompassing understanding of
sexual health and individual accountability. Students who got CSE were less likely to
experience sexual assault because they were better equipped to handle emotional and
social obstacles, according to a 2017 research published in the Journal of Adolescent
Health. On the other hand, Abstinence-Only Programs (AOP) frequently overlook these
crucial life lessons, leaving youngsters unable to handle intimate and relational
circumstances in the real world.
Adolescents who get Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) not only have their urgent
sexual health issues addressed, but also have long-term good effects. CSE helps young
people make healthy decisions far into adulthood by giving them the tools necessary to
negotiate sexual relationships and critical thinking. Studies show that those who had
CSE as adults are more likely to have healthier relationships and safer sexual
behaviours. In contrast to those who participated in Abstinence-Only Programs, those
who received education through CSE programs reported reduced rates of unwanted
pregnancies and STIs in their later years, according to a research published in Sexuality
Research and Social Policy. This shows that the fundamental abilities and information
acquired by CSE not only shield teenagers during their adolescent years but also
inculcate
Exploration of Opposing Position

Evidence reveals that Abstinence-Only Programs (AOP) are less successful in attaining
these aims, despite the fact that advocates of AOP contend that these programs
provide the greatest way to avoid teen pregnancies and STIs. AOP emphasises
abstinence as the sole way to prevent hazards to one's sexual health and frequently
places a higher value on moral or religious beliefs than on useful health information.
Advocates assert that teaching abstinence encourages teenagers to postpone having
sex, which lowers the risk of STIs and pregnancy.
Additionally, AOP ignores the range of experiences that young people have. These
programs ignore the concerns of LGBTQ+ adolescents and teens who might not adhere
to standard heterosexual norms by advocating a one-size-fits-all strategy focused on
abstinence until marriage. This isolation can exacerbate harmful health effects by
fostering emotions of stigma and alienation. According to a 2016 study that was
published in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, programs that solely
promote abstinence frequently encourage youth to feel guilty and ashamed about their
sexuality. This can lead to a decrease in their self-worth and an increase in risk-taking
behaviours.
Adolescents often find abstinence to be an unattainable aim, as highlighted by critics of

AOP. No matter what kind of sex education they receive, studies indicate that most
teenagers will engage in sexual activity by the time they graduate from high school.
Therefore, it only increases their risk to suppress knowledge on safe sex practices and
contraception. According to a 2007 assessment published in the American Journal of
Public Health, AOP fails to prevent unwanted births in young people and instead raises
their risk of contracting STIs and unplanned pregnancies.
Supporters of AOP contend that abstinence is the only 100% effective strategy to avoid
getting pregnant and contracting STIs, yet this viewpoint ignores the realities of
adolescent behaviour. On the flip side, comprehensive sex education reduces the
overall incidence of teen pregnancies and STIs by acknowledging that some teenagers
will participate in sexual activity and giving them the skills to protect themselves.
Because of this, CSE provides a more useful and all-encompassing approach to sexual
health education.
Conclusion
In summary, Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) is a more practical and successful

strategy than Abstinence-Only Programs (AOP) for lowering adolescent pregnancies
and STIs. CSE gives young people the tools they need to make educated decisions
about their sexual health by arming them with accurate, research-backed information on
consent, healthy relationships, and contraception. AOP, on the other hand, ignores the
complexity of teenage behaviour and leaves students unprepared for adult settings,
which eventually results in increased rates of unprotected sex and detrimental health
effects.
The data is in favour of CSE: it prevents hazardous sexual behaviour, postpones the
initiation of sexual engagement, and gives them the skills they need to safeguard
themselves against STIs and unwanted pregnancies. It is imperative that schools
implement CSE programs in light of the serious public health risks associated with
adolescent sexual behaviour in order to guarantee that all youth receive the instruction
necessary to lead responsible and healthy lives.
Reference
Rush, M. (2023, May 19). Abstinence-Only VS Comprehensive Sex Education.

American Nurse. https://www.myamericannurse.com/abstinence-only-vs-
comprehensive-sex-education/
‌Kohler, P. K., Manhart, L. E., & Lafferty, W. E. (2008). Abstinence-Only and
Comprehensive Sex Education and the Initiation of Sexual Activity and Teen
Pregnancy. Journal of Adolescent Health, 42(4), 344–351.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.026
Serenko, A. (2019). Sex Ed: Barriers and Benefits. Global Citizen.
https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/sex-ed-barriers-and-benefits/
Mark, N. D. E., & Wu, L. L. (2022). More comprehensive sex education reduced teen
births: Quasi-experimental evidence. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 119(8). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2113144119
Staff, N. (n.d.). Abstinence Only: Joint Statement and Opposition. National Coalition
against Censorship. https://ncac.org/resource/abstinence-only-joint-
statement-opposition
Table of Contents page: Journal of Adolescent Health. (n.d.). Www.jahonline.org.
https://www.jahonline.org/issue/S1054-139X(17)X0014-1
springerprofessional.de. (2015). Springerprofessional.de; springerprofessional.de.
https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/sexuality-research-and-social-
policy/4958908
Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. (2021, June 28). Guttmacher
Institute. https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/psrh?volume=52&issue
American Journal of Public Health. (n.d.). Www.apha.org.
https://www.apha.org/Publications/American-Journal-of-Public-Health

JLO 220 Assignment 2 Position Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JLO 220 Assignment 2 Position Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

JLO 220 Assignment 2 Position Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comprehensive Sex Education vs.

Argument for Your Position

Exploration of Opposing Position

Adolescents often find abstinence to be an unattainable aim, as highlighted by critics of

In summary, Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) is a more practical and successful

Rush, M. (2023, May 19). Abstinence-Only VS Comprehensive Sex Education.

You might also like