ROCKLAND, Maine — Margo Arruda, now 17, remembers seventh-grade sex education as being altogether mortifying.
“Oh, my God, it was so awkward,” the Portland teen said this week.
The students learned how to put a condom on a banana. They giggled at the constant joking of classmates. They wanted to flee the room. And Margo came away with one primary lesson learned:
“It was basically, if you have sex, we can’t stop you. But if you do, use a condom,” she said.
New, nonbinding standards released in early January by a national coalition of health and education groups are aimed at minimizing out-of-context sexual education experiences like Margo’s. Among other recommendations, schools are urged to encourage age-appropriate discussions about sticky topics such as sex, bullying and healthy relationships early, building a foundation for those conversations before second grade.
Some Maine educators say that low teen pregnancy rates here show that the state’s existing sex education programs are working. But others believe that there is room for improvement when it comes to teaching Maine children about sex.
‘A sacred and beautiful thing’
The Rev. Mark Glovin of the First Universalist Church in Rockland described the Our Whole Lives sexuality education program that is offered to people ages 5 through adult as comprehensive and age-appropriate. On Sunday, the church began an eight-week session for children ages 5 to 8.
“It teaches about healthy boundaries and good decision-making,” Glovin said of the program. “It’s about individual integrity within relationships, and recognizes that human sexuality is a sacred and beautiful thing.”
Margo, who participated in Our Whole Lives at the church shortly after the school sex ed unit ended, loved the program.
“It was amazing,” she said. “It was an opportunity for people my age to sit down and really talk about the things we’re all expected to know. We spent just as much time, if not more time, trying to decide how to take steps in your relationship. How to have a healthy, functioning relationship. How to manage everyday relationships with people. It was so useful.”
According to Glovin and Carney Doucette, director of religious explorations at the church, the curriculum for the youngest participants is aimed at helping them learn about different types of families. They also will learn accurate names for their body parts and that their bodies are “sacred and private,” Doucette said.
Though what gets learned by students changes through the different programs, the philosophy remains the same.
“This gives real-world, real-life instruction on how to have a healthy relationship with your sexuality,” Glovin said.
He said that he was shocked to learn how sex education is taught in public schools. There, kids learn more about how to prevent pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, he said. In the church-offered program, they also learn about emotions, communication and diversity.
“It was just a world of difference,” Glovin said.
The law
In Maine, a state law passed in 2002 addressed the issue of “family life education,” according to David Connerty-Marin, spokesman for the Maine Department of Education. Local school districts are expected to use a comprehensive approach to sex education, which means that students from kindergarten through 12th grade will learn about human development and sexuality. The law states that students will be educated about contraception and diseases in a medically accurate and age-appropriate way.
Reacting to the new sex education recommendations released by the national coalition in January, Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Education Abstinence Association, said abstinence should be the focus of any such programs.
Although the Maine family life education law emphasizes abstinence, it also stresses teaching students about individual responsibility regarding sexuality, healthy relationships and communications skills.
While the standards are set by the state, the curriculum is designed and implemented by local school districts, Connerty-Marin said.
The data show that the comprehensive approach is a good one, according to the education spokesman and Lynette Johnson, director of prevention programs at the Family Planning Association of Maine.
The most recent teen pregnancy numbers in Maine show 24.4 births per 1,000 females ages 15 to 19. Nationally, the rate is 39.1 per thousand, according to figures from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“Maine once had one of the highest teen pregnancy rates,” Connerty-Marin said. “We now have the fifth lowest.”
Also, Maine teens have increased their abstinence rate by 6 percent in the last decade, from 48 percent of teens self-reporting abstinence in 1999 to 54 percent in 2009.
“Even with the comprehensive approach [to sex ed], we’re seeing that half of our teens are choosing to be abstinent,” Johnson said. “When they do have sex, our teens have one of the highest rates of contraceptive use … We’ve done a good job.”
That’s despite funding cuts to her program that have meant Family Planning Association educators, who go to high schools and middle schools when invited by teachers, had to curtail most of this kind of outreach.
“Our goal is to help schools implement comprehensive, or evidence-based programs,” she said. “It’s more sustainable.”
Preaching abstinence is a good way to get teen girls pregnant. Keep religion and emotions out education, it only hurts the impressionable minds. If everything was taught with safety in mind and not what is religiously appropriate then the world would be safer and less lives would be lost to under age drinking and teen pregnancies.
Abstinence does not work. It never has. Teach kids about safe sex. Teach kids about safe alcohol consumption.
You’r ideas are strangely dangerous for one so concerned with safety. Abstinence does not work? How can you say such a thing? Families who live a life of love and discipline do not suffer the crass and jaded view the rest of the world seems to have toward sex nowadays. My high school Health teacher’s gross description of certain venereal diseases did absolutely nothing to prevent kids from having sex. Serious consequences that are lovingly applied absolutely work. If they did not, then we would not have made it this far.
There is a lot of evidence that abstinence only education does not work. It does not prevent premarital sex and when thise in abstinence only programs do have sex, they are much more likely to skip any sort of protection, driving up STD and pregnancy rates. It is very nice to teach your children your worldview and your morals to strive for, but the majority of teenagers will still have sex before marriage. This is not an opinion, this is reality.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2011/12/01/researchers_find_that_abstinence_only_sex_education_does_not_in_fact_promote_abstinence.html
Although at first glance the evidence can seem confusing, with claims coming from both groups about the proven effectiveness of programmes embodying their values, when only the most reliable studies are taken into account the position is clear.21 There is good evidence, from reviews of studies and studies of programmes implemented in the US, UK and other European countries and countries in Africa and Asia, that comprehensive sex education can reduce behaviours that put young people at risk of HIV, STIs and unintended pregnancy.22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Studies have repeatedly shown too that this kind of sex education does not lead to the earlier onset of sexual activity among young people and, in some cases, will even lead to it happening later.
“Studies have repeatedly shown that comprehensive sex education does not lead to earlier onset of sexual activity”
In contrast, there is no such robust evidence for the effectiveness of abstinence education. Almost all the studies that have claimed to show any positive outcomes are not well enough designed to sustain these claims so it is not possible to infer whether they work or not from the research reports.31 32 33 Several academic reviews suggest that abstinence only programmes generally have no effects on young people’s sexual behaviour. In just a few cases abstinence only programmes may encourage young people to delay first sexual intercourse in the short-term. Worryingly, some of these studies also suggest that compared to other young people those who do receive abstinence only programmes may be less knowledgeable about STDs and less likely to believe that condoms provide effective protection against them.34 35
Link to the source quoted above: http://www.avert.org/abstinence.htm
I admire your diligence in trying to prove me wrong. Sadly, you missed my stated premise on how best to prevent children from having sex at too young an age. Create a loving home which contains real discipline, for errant behavior, and more importantly, the kind of discipline that fosters living their lives with accountability and respect for themselves and others. I was a teenager once in a large high school, and among the more well-behaved of us, very few had sex-period. So, I know first hand without having to consult any peer-reviewed journals that it can be done.
That is called anecdotal evidence, once again. Those peer reviewed journals contain real facts and statistics that take into account some people just not being able to get laid in high school.
You aren’t going to prevent people from having sex. It is a basic human instinct to procreate and puberty is the body saying that it is biologically ready to do so. Rather than attempt to prevent them from having sex, which will not work, teach them to have sex responsibly. This is effective and continues to be proven effective. If alcohol awareness and responsibility was taught in the same manner, issues stemming from under age drinking would lessen dramatically. Just looking at other countries and the way they handle their sex and alcohol education would show that America and its religion based “moral superiority” laws do not work.
The entire Christian religion is based on the knowledge that abstinence doesn’t work.
Abstinence works fine. Abstinence-only education doesn’t work worth a tinker’s damn. Just ask Bristol Palin.
“abstinence doesnt work”
say that to my daughter who has never had sex and lo and behold, has never had a baby! I think abstinence works like a charm.
This is called anecdotal evidence and it doesn’t apply to legitimate debate and discussion. How old is your daughter? How do you know she doesn’t have sex? How do you know she isn’t pregnant right now?
Abstinence education only does not work. Obviously one who does not have sex will not get pregnant. You can’t control every person, and they should be armed with knowledge for when they do decide to have sex.
And a lot of teenager girls do not view oral or anal sex as truly having sex. As long as their hymen is in place they are still a virgin but yet, they are still having sex.
I find it awesome that your daughter has yet to have sex but to claim abstinence works like a charm is 100% false.
Your friend Bill Clinton would agree with them !
So would Mitt Romney and John Huntsman in their sacred undergarments.
I don’t care for those two either !
I’ve even seen literature that insists non-virgin women can go to abstinence and consider themselves “virgin”. No kidding, it’s out there.
That you know of.. how many children are going to tell their parents that they have had sex..
The data supports your position. In a study by the University of Georgia published last Nov., they showed that states that use Federal money to teach abstinence had higher pregnancy rates than states that taught a comprehensive curriculum about teen sex. In Oct. 2010 a CDC study had reached the same conclusion.
What is so wrong about learning how to properly use a condom? What is so wrong about wanting to prevent pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases which condoms help prevent?
I will continue to expose my 13 year old child to the real world of what sex is and teach them the facts. I have no desire for my child to start having sex anytime soon but if they do I want them to at least know how to go about it safely so I don’t become a grandfather in my 40’s.
I wonder if this church even talks about masturbation which is 100% healthy and normal and should not be discouraged or taught as being a terrible thing.
Talk to your children about sex, it is not a scary or hard thing to do and I have no clue why any parent would ever state it is awkward or uncomfortable for them to do so. It is your job to teach your children about these things. Not the job of a church, or a sex education teacher at their school, it is your job to tell them the truth.
And let them know that masturbating is ok and should not be frowned upon and if you flag this post because I mentioned masturbation I feel bad for you.
Whats so difficult about telling your kid that having sex before adulthood is wrong? Rather than encourage “safe sex” we should encourage “no sex”, what could be safer than that?
why not teach both?
because abstinence is the only 100% proven method.
good luck controlling those hormones. A teenager who wants to have sex is going to, regardless of how you feel about it. The best thing we can do, is to teach them that it is best to wait, but we should also prepare them to protect themselves from STD’s and pregnancy.
But at least they’ll feel real guilty when they do have sex. And isn’t that the most important thing?
Apparenlty guilt is the sole purpose.
Proven to do what? Fail repeatedly? Statistics prove that proper education reduces pregnancies and STD transmission.
Tell that to Mary and Joseph.
Actually, I wish someone had. I wouldn’t be dealing with all these sexually uptight Christians.
To be fair, you can’t really blame Joseph… he was in the other room the whole time and had nothing to do with it.
Well, that and sterilization.
Here is what drives me bananas about the religious crowd. When I was a kid in the 1970’s, the idea for all educational subjects was that we learned everything about everything, the good, the bad, and the ugly. We were presumed to have a good enough head on our shoulders, based upon being taught the behavior expected of a lady and a gentleman, to make the right decisions. We didn’t pray for stuff to happen. We made it happen. I recall in high school, we studied capitalism, socialism, and every other “-ism.” We read the New Yorker, the Communist Daily (some English/Chinese paper), and all other sources of everything. Then, we would discuss it and evaluate it. We usually came up with the typical American viewpoints: capitalism and individual freedoms. While we did not study religions in depth, we did study a bit of the viewpoints, their differences, and their impact on history.
The religious crowd, on the other hand, much like many home-schooled kids, teaches idealism (their version) of the world with no exposure the the real world. This is setting kids up for disaster as the real world will eat them alive. I have a number of friends in their late 60’s who, to this day, have very little understanding of human sexuality, biology, and how the “real world” works. They attended very strict Catholic schools (but it could have been any similar limited-exposure school) where biology was not taught and, of course, human sexuality consisted of, well, you can imagine.
Here is my view: Teach the kids everything. Teach them the clinical, biological aspects of the mechanics of the subject. Teach them social responsibility and about human interpersonal relationships – and be sure to cover all sides and all variations, including LGBT, as statistically, there will be some kids in the classes for whom this has direct meaning. For those kids who are not LGBT, teaching that it exists may promote a bit more tolerance on their side and might address some of this bullying in school and bigotry later in life. Take a wild guess at how much of this would be taught in those uptight Christian schools.
The statistics are quite clear – abstinence-ONLY education has a poor success rate. The comprehensive program in Maine works. Look at the numbers. Why go back to the stone ages? My high-school was kind of a pilot school for this type of education. The surrounding rural schools without this comprehensive education had much higher teen pregnancies. I am reminded when I was a kid of a young woman and her husband who moved in next door. They had 4 kids right in a row. It seemed like she was always pregnant. Good Catholic family and all that. I overheard her and my mother talking over coffee. She told my Mom, “As soon I a figured out what was causing that [pregnancies] I put a stop to that!” And, true to her word, no more kids. Her husband started drinking. Eventually they were divorced. I am sure birth control was never considered – good Catholics and all.
So, go back to that world, or move forward. Your choice, or I should say, your kid’s future.
you do realize that the OWL curriculum was created by the Unitarian Universalists and the United Church of Christ (Congregationalists) and is the most progressive, sex-positive, age-appropriate curriculum currently in existence, right? Don’t assume that these “church folks” are the same as the conservative fundamentalist ones. We believe in healthy bodies, healthy children, healthy growth and healthy relationships and the curriculum is designed to promote those things. And yes, masturbation is included in that discussion as a natural part of healthy sexuality.
Oh, I agree entirely. In fact, when I read the article and saw the UU’s were involved, I expected the curriculum to be complete. My response was to the people who are the conservative religious types who feel that an abstinence-only program works.
My experience is that the ultra-conservative types have blinders pop-riveted to their heads at birth. When you say a “church program” is going to talk about teen sex, they immediately assume an abstinence-only, Christian-only, white-only, English-only, church where they “pray away the gay.” Rather than a panoramic view of the world, it is more what can be seen through a church-approved keyhole.
I think the schools should at least teach all the mechanics and biological issues, STDs, contraception, etc. It would be nice if they could delve into the human emotional side focusing on inter-personal relationships and what sexual relations with another person means. That said, they may not be as well adapted to this need than perhaps other programs such as those produced by the UU’s.
Actually, as a small child I attended the Universalist church before it joined with the Unitarians. My family historically is from the Boston area and are Congregationalists. And, yes, social liberalism is the name of the game. In fact, I guess I would say “education and awareness of all of the world” is the overriding goal. We are the antithesis of the more stodgy, dogmatic, religions who discourage exploration into areas not approved of by the church (under the threat of Eternal Damnation).
Since the UU’s are known to be LGBT friendly, are LGBT issues also taught in this OWL program or did the ultra-conservative “Christians” get wrapped around the axle and started picketing the place? Honestly, I have learned to put nothing past these people. They never cease to amaze me. It is kind of like being in the Middle East – fewer bombs, a different religion, but about the same number of zealots convinced their way is the only way.
Yea, it worked great for Sarah Palin’s daughter, Family Values!
David, all good sexuality education programs include abstinence. But the conservative move to teach ONLY abstinence is not based on any research facts. No large research study has ever shown that abstinence only education moves our children’s onset of sexual activity significantly into the future. When we give our young adults all the information they need to make proper decisions and how to protect themselves, then both safe sex AND abstinence increase.
Only if observed. Very large dropout (and pregancy rate).
There is nothing wrong with telling them they should not have sex. I tell my child all the time I have zero desire for you to start having sex in the next couple of years but if it does happen I want them to know how to use proper protection.
How do you feel about teaching them that masturbation is 100% ok if they feel the urge to sleep with someone? I would rather have my child go home and masturbate than sleep with another person.
As for adulthood, how do you define adulthood? At what age do you feel a teenager should have sex?
Sex isn’t wrong. That is your biggest hole in your argument. Sex in a fundamental part of life, in fact life wouldn’t exist without it. Rather than shove religious “morals” off on everyone, realize that education works. Abstinence has been proven through legitimate science to NOT WORK.
Nothing is wrong with it. Just don’t expect it to work any better then telling your teenager to call before they are late, plan ahead, don’t try cigarettes and make your bed before you leave.
OK, but it should not be the only thing “taught”.
Biological “adulthood” is getting younger and younger. Evidence indicates girls are starting their periods younger and younger and the gap between development is getting wider (breast development starting at 8. period starting at 10/11) So not only do we need to not just teach abstinence. we need to evaluate the whole “age appropriate” sex education. These girls’ bodies are talking to them and they need to have the whole story so they can react to what their bodies are saying.
Why do you think it is that these girls are developing earlier? Might have something to do with the sexual messages kids are being bombarded with these days. You say that their “bodies are talking to them.” Their brains are also talking to their bodies, and their “switch” just might be influenced by the content of their mental diet. Parents need to be more responsible for what children are being subjected to in the media as well as the utter failure that is public education.
Lol yea that’s it, its the media, not the evidence that points to growth hormone’s in dairy and other food products. If breast development and growth were influenced by media, why do women bother paying huge sums for augmentation when they could simply watch t.v.?
So, instead of eliminating the intake of growth hormones, you’d advocate for earlier sex education?
How about we do both. If we have changed these girls this way, there is a good chance their children will also begin puberty earlier. My point was “age appropriate” isn’t based on the number of trips a person has taken around the sun. It has more to do with what is going on with their bodies.
What about their emotional and intellectual age? You can’t correct mistakes made by short-sightedness with still more of it.
Going to have to disagree with you on this one because it is rare for a girl to start her period when she is 10 or 11 and even rarer for them to start growing breast at the age of 8.
I’m not saying these things do not happen but they are the minority, not the majority.
Every study shows that abstience only education doesn’t work. Just look at the teen pregnancy rates in the south.
Because “encouraging no sex” simply doesn’t work … that has been proven by teen pregnancy rates for far too many years.
Any sex education class that focuses on ‘just say no’ and ‘healthy boundaries’ and pretends that teaching teenagers about condom use is ‘out of context’ will do nothing but increase the rates of teenage pregnancy. Oh, and it might make the adults feel better (at least until the pregnancy is discovered).
I think it’s important to let kids know why they should hold off on sex and why it’s important to wait, and why it’s important to use protection if they don’t wait. The consequences of getting an STD or emotional distress or pregnancy are often sufficient to cause kids to delay sexual behavior, and there’s no better place to be vividly exposed to these consequences and what they look like, than sex ed.
We can’t rely on false fears and scare tactics to work, or not for very long. Ultimately kids need to make their own decision and all we can do is provide them with as much information as possible so that they can make their own informed decisions. Without education, they can’t make informed decisions.
I think the biggest fear for young people should be “aids”. Sleeping around, even using condoms does not guarantee that you will not get it. Pregnancy is not helpful to young girls that are in high school there are so many negatives connected with it, but at least it is not a disease that you die from. Young men should be wary of contracting aids also.
I’m not sure why we still argue about this topic so much. 20 years ago, I was taught in public school that, while abstinence was certainly the most effective birth control, my hormones would dictate otherwise and there were several other options I could employ. We were taught the relative effectiveness of all forms of contraception, and then talked about the emotional implications of sex. This information has been a huge help to me in avoiding unwanted pregnancies. That, and I enjoyed a lot of great sex with no unnecessary guilt.
And here we are, 20 years later, still trying to come to a consensus on how to teach about the birds and the bees.
Those kids who were sheltered 20 years age had kids 10 years ago and now are trying to shelter them. It is a vicious cycle.
Exactly. See my posting above. The lady with the 4 kids is very uptight sexually and quite anti-gay, for example.
If you truly believe that the 48% of high school kids “self reporting” that they are practicing abstinence, then I have some prime beachfront real estate in AZ to sell you!
I’ve taught the OWL curriculum 5 times over the years, at both the middle school and high school levels. It is an extensive curriculum that talks about everything from relationships to consequences. To protecting oneself from STDs and pregnancy, to handling hard conversations with potential partners/dates.
Consider how long adults are likely to participate in a sexual relationship over the course of their lives. Wouldn’t it be helpful to have some exposure to a wide variety of topics related to relationships and sexuality? Just as we require teaching math so we can balance our checkbook, and drivers education so we won’t run someone over? Remember you need a license to be a driver, own a dog, or carry a gun; but any fool can be a parent and no experience or education is required.
And by “fool”, I’m paraphrasing from a popular saying. I love being a parent, so don’t jump on that part of what I wrote.
Labeling something as ‘sacred’ is foolishness.
Church teaching sex education…are you serious?
Just what I need, a man of the Church teaching my kids sex ed! Doesnt give me that warm and fuzzy feeling
Attitudes towards sex are personal, as are attitudes towards God. You get to have your opinion on the matters, but don’t expect schools to parent your children and teach your own personal emotional/religious model. Fact is, a lack of information is dangerous. Children and teens should know about these things. If you think that is lacking in some way, then provide supplemental information — you are a parent after all, that’s what you’re supposed to do.