How to implement a comprehensive abstinance as choice in our public schools

How we implemented a comprehensive abstinance as a choice in our public schools

Comprehensive Health Course #9910 (CH)

  • This is a comprehensive abstinence- based human growth and development unit. While abstinence is promoted as the preferred choice, other topics such as the human reproduction system, contraception, options after pregnancy, and confidentiality laws a
    also discussed.

vs.

Abstinence Only Health Course #9940 (AH)

  • This is a comprehensive abstinence program in which all discussion is centered around abstinence as the only accepted healthy choice for teens before marriage. It will focus in depth on character development and the social, emotional, psychological, and physical benefits of practicing abstinence.

How to Implement a Comprehensive Abstinence Unit as a Choice in Your School DistrictAll arguments favor a choice for both students and their parents. There are no logical arguments to prevent parents and students from having a choice of classes that includes a comprehensive abstinence unit in the curriculum at the high school level and often at the middle school level.
Prayer: Bear in mind, the three most important things are pray, pray and pray. There is no hope apart from the grace of God to move hearts and souls. I include all four forms of prayer, known by the acronym, “ A.R.T.S.”, Adoration, Repentance, Thanksgiving, and Supplication. There are other acronyms for the same thing such as doing our “P.A.R.T.”, Petition, Adoration, Repentance, and Thanksgiving.

]A few important steps toward implementation

  1. One must learn when the next school district’s Human Growth and Development Curriculum Review Committee begins. One must seek to be part of this committee and seek to make changes there. This is where the initial decision is made, as far as implementing a choice in the tenth grade health class or at the middle school level. This committee is required by state law to convene every three years.
  2. If one can get the committee to recommend to the school board to consider such an option, then the next step is to convince the school board that it is in their best interest to do so.
  3. Based on experience, it is not likely to convince a school district to exclusively offer an abstinence only unit as a replacement for the school district’s comprehensive sex education unit—which touches on abstinence and in the same breath supports contraception.

Arguments used to justify the passage of providing a comprehensive abstinence only choice

  1. This health education class at the high school level is the only place where the school district provides no choice for parents. In many areas such as; math, social sciences, sciences and English, there are a number of choices for parents and their children, as far as which classes they will take. For social science, examples include; history, geography, sociology and psychology.

  2. There would be no substantial cost increase to offer an alternative class. There is also money available for comprehensive abstinence only curricula through governmental grants. All that is necessary for a school district to offer this choice is for 15-20 students out of roughly 400 students to sign up to take the alternative course. The same teachers could teach either course. There would be no additional personnel costs.

  3. Health education is the only curriculum where the school touches the heart of family, parents and their children in their personal and religious beliefs. This strikes at the heart of parent and family rights. Parents and their children deserve to have a choice in this course.

  4. In order to support a cultural diverse society and in order to support and show concern for families and their children, it is not only fair, but also beneficial to offer an alternative. There is no logical reason to deny an alternative comprehensive abstinence curriculum for children and their families. It would stand against freedom of choice and freedom of religion, if the school board chooses to deny offering this option.

  5. All of Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, and Islam teach on the basis of their scripture that sex outside of marriage is wrong. Only the religion of Humanism (and perhaps a few others) approve and support sex outside of marriage. So at present, in essence, one religious worldview is being supported over the majority of
    other religions.

  6. Up until the 1930’s all Christian denominations taught that the use of artificial contraception was sinful. The teaching of artificial contraception has been and in some cases, continues to be a direct attack on strongly held religious beliefs. Offering a choice in these circumstances would prevent the alienation of a substantial number of students’ families.

[LEFT]7. To deny this choice would seem to indicate that the intent of government at all levels is to indoctrinate and to
dictate to parents and families. It is ultimately tyrannical in nature. Government education under these circumstances will continue to see families abandon so-called public education, with a continuing decline in students and money.
. [/LEFT]
8. We need to be “progressive”, like the West Allis-West Milwaukee School District.

  1. Finally, offering this choice will demonstrate the school district’s desire to act in the best interest of all it’s students. “It’s always for the kids”!

I’d like to hear more on how you got the school board to approve it, and what opposition did you face. how well is this program working?

Every study done on abstinence only programs proves very conclusively that they not only don’t work, they are counterproductive. The incidence of STD contraction and teen pregnancy actually goes up when comprehensive sex education is removed from the programs.

Many states are now refusing federal abstinence only monies because they are tied to a requirement that no comprehensive sex education can be taught. Since states have a vested interest in the well being of their children, they are refusing such monies in favor of programs that work, namely comprehensive sex education which includes abstinence as A alternative but gives teens the rest of the information they need to make an informed choice.

I’m told as well, that according to studies done, the “promises” program of young teens promising no sex before marriage also fails. The reports suggest that these teens have see before marriage in the same exact numbers as all other teens.

I think the key term there is “as a choice.” If we insert “abstinance only” as an option on top of comprehensive sex education, then that’s alright. But to present it as the only viable option would definately be a mistake.

Abstinence only programs have not proven “successful”…

openeducation.net/2009/01/05/abstinence-only-sex-education-statistics-final-nail-in-the-coffin/

***Effectiveness of Program
Previously, when discussing abstinence-only education, most people would reference a recent summary by the Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane folks studied 13 abstinence-only education programs - they could not find one that showed an “enduring effect” on teen’s sexual behavior.

In addition to the Cochrane study, another federally funded study of four abstinence-only programs by the Mathematica Policy Research Inc., published in April of 2007, revealed similar results. The research group found that “participants had just as many sexual partners as nonparticipants and had sex at the same median age as nonparticipants.” In other words, abstinence education programs did nothing favorable - the result was the same as if there were no program being offered at all.

Now a third study, this by Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, revealed some of the most troubling data of all. A national longitudinal study of adolescents, specifically 934 high school students, examined one of the factors used as a measurement of success for abstinence-only education programs, the virginity pledge.

Final Nail in the Coffin
In the most recent study, researchers compared teens who had taken the virginity pledge to those who had not taken a pledge. The researchers found results similar to the aforementioned studies.

First, the rate of the teens taking part in sex was the same. Those taking the virginity pledge were just as likely to have intercourse. The only positive, statistically small, was that those taking the pledge had 0.1 fewer sex partners over the five year study than did those who did not take such a pledge.

However, two other findings were most damning. First, those taking the virginity pledge were less likely to protect themselves. Pledge takers were found to be less frequent users of condoms and other forms of birth control.

anqaTherefore, those youngsters who took the virginity pledge were not only just as likely to have intercourse, they ultimately were more likely to take part in sex in an unsafe manner. This has led experts to conclude that the lessons students take from their abstinence-only education programs is a negative and/or faulty view of contraception.

Second, and most importantly, virginity pledges are one of the measurement tools for determining if the abstinence education program is effective. For these federal funded programs, the government has counted pledges as data that the program is effective.

Rosenbaum summarizes the data succinctly, “Abstinence-only education is required to give inaccurate information. Teens are savvy consumers of information and know what they are getting.”***

Some reasons why:

irregulartimes.com/abstinenceed.html

advocatesforyouth.org/publications/stateevaluations.pdf

nomoremoney.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewPage&pageID=951&nodeID=5

I find it interesting that the very people who rail against Big Government being involved in the daily life of people and who are against “big government” are the very ones who are the direct proponents of replacing the churches and parents responsibility for teaching their children moral values!! Millions and millions of tax dollars have been thrown at this by the Bush administration, and in fact its been going on in reality since 1981 in one form or another…and its been a failure.

If parents were to have more of a hand in their child’s life, and set an actual example, with a few subtle or non-subtle “threats”… yes I used that “non-politically correct” word… Threats that forebode dire consequences when the kid knows they will be backed up, go much farther than you can imagine.

My own father made it “amply” clear when I reached puberty, that If I caused a girl to become pregnant, or got caught in the act of sex…I would dearly regret it. In fact, in the case of pregnancy…he told me he would “beat me to death”. I knew my father well, and I knew he was good for his word. Needless to say, I was probably known as one of the “safest guys in school to date” both by the girls as well as their parents.

Frankly, its the parents ultimate responsibility to teach their children their moral values, not the school system. The studies have proven the lack of efficacy of “abstinence only” education.

BTW…I issued the exact same “threat” and got the same results. No pregnancies or issues…otherwise.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.