How sex ed harms girls' health

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | November 16, 2007 | Ashley Herzog

[HerzogAEH]

This is an excerpt from a column I wrote for WorldNetDaily.com last week. It is about how politically correct sex education is harming girls' health. The full version can be reached through the link above.

As an intern at the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute, I’ve been working with our Senior Fellow, Miriam Grossman, M.D., author of the book Unprotected: A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student. Dr. Grossman has garnered media attention because she exposed the fact that health educators often risk students’ well-being in order to promote a particular ideology -- usually a combination of feminism, androgyny, and “anything goes” liberalism.

In the upside-down world of politically correct health care, the main priority is to never make “moral judgments” about a patient’s behavior, and factual information is suppressed if it threatens political agendas.

I’ve been researching sex education and sexual health care for Dr. Grossman’s columns and articles. I’ve browsed health websites, “sex ed” manuals, even teen magazines like CosmoGIRL and Seventeen. Although much of the health information is politicized, the advice offered to young girls on sexual decision-making is downright scandalous.

“There is no right time to have your first intercourse. This is a choice you make,” declares GoAskAlice.com, a popular health Web site. This canard is repeated ad nauseum in sex education programs and magazines geared toward middle and high school students, such as Seventeen (don’t let the name fool you – most of its readership is under 16).

“There is no correct age at which you are ‘supposed’ to have sex,” declares the health Web site coolnurse.com. “Everyone has to make a very personal decision about what is right for them.”

Really? What if a girl decides sex is right for her at age 12 or 13?

[Polybius]

The right time to start having sex:
Look at your left hand. Do you have a gold band on your ring finger?
Look at the person you want to have sex with. Does he have a ring, too?
Do you have the same last name?
Do you remember marrying him?
Are you someplace nice and private?
You'll figure it out. You can do anything that makes the two of you feel wonderful. You've got all the time in the world.

1957 version of your preconditions:

2007 version of your preconditions:

[unixfox]

I’m single.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Oh! I guess nowadays one has to specify “actual” marriage, not “pseudo” marriage. Otheerwise, somebody’ll show up with his (or her) Irish setter. With a ring on its, um, paw.

[Aquinasfan]

Some have argued that we should be teaching teens “outercourse” as a defense to engaging in intercourse. It’s just a ruse. Just as the issue of condoms in school forever shifted the argument from IF teens should have sex to WHEN...

Yeah. It's a diabolically clever argument, but still bogus. It's pretty obvious to all but the deliberately blind what "outercourse" leads to.

[Aquinasfan]

The big problem is that liberals do not acknowledge and/or disregard Natural Law.

Yeah, but disregarding the natural moral law has the same effect as disregarding the natural physical laws. The insanity of the former is a bit more difficult to see than the latter but, nevertheless, it's our duty to point out the errors in their reasoning.

Of course, deep down, they seem to know the irrationality of their position, since they seem averse to reasoned argument, to be more than charitable.

[gondramB]

>> I doubt this. California, which pushes, promotes, and provides contraceptives to singles all over the state via student health and counseling staff, county health offices, subsidies to Planned Parenthood and other providers, and a constant drumbeat in the schools, has skyrocketing STD rates.

---

So what “outcomes” do you want to document for us?<<

The STD rise correlate with the decreased emphasis on education and birth control under the current administration.

Teens have sex. Its later these days than it was for most of the last 10,000 years. Unless we them to have maximum consequences, like STDs, pregnancy and (as long it remains legal) lots of abortions they need cheap or free birth control, barriers and education that focuses on safety.

[bvw]

Good points. And even when the marriage between two who met on their own -- they are wise to get their families "advice and consent" before moving in with each other, before engaging, before marrying.

And the family's advice that says not to "move in" before marriage is good advice.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"The STD rise correlate with the decreased emphasis on education and birth control under the current administration."

I doubt this, too.

It's certainly not true in California, where 96 percent of the school districts provide "comprehensive" sexual health education (promoting and providing free access to contraception and abortion), and all California schools have been required to teach HIV/AIDS prevention education since 1992.

California law prohibits 'abstinence-only' education in the public schools. In addition, California may be the only state in the country that has refused to accept millions of federal dollars for abstinence education.

California is the state that reports 1.1 million new cases of STI's: in the 15-24 age group, diseases such as chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, HPV and HIV now infect almost one out of every four young Californians.

"Teens have sex."

Some do, some don't. Age of sexual debut goes down, and frequency of intercourse and numbers of partners tend to go up with the availability of contraceptives, till you get figures like those found in the ultimate sexual wonderland of California.

The use of condoms is linked to increased rates of both pregnancy and abortion, due to the slip-rip-and-drip, wear-and-tear factors, plus the fact that adolescents are the very worst demographic group in terms of reliably using a condom EVERY TIME.

So when the pregnancy rate goes up,the omnicompetent government pubic authorities tend to opt for hormonal contraception instead (pills, implants, injectables, patches, NuvaRing and the rest) which enhances the infection rate due to chemical changes in the female endometrium.

So there ya go. (a) Condoms = more pregnancies. (b) Hormonal contraception = more STI's. Then there's (c) Promiscuity = more depression and suicide attempts, especially (again) in females.

But I guess that's a price some adults are willing to pay. Especially if they're in some way in a position to benefit from the status sexualis quo: "Teens have sex."

[gondramB]

Here is the CDC's STD trend report from 2000 You'll notice every single major STD was trending down.

It was when the abstinence was pushed instead of safety and when protection and barriers were deemphasized following the 2000 election that rates began to rise again, reversing decades of progress.

http://www.cdc.gov/std/Trends2000/Trends2000.pdf

In contrast, here is a graph from the 2004 report - you can already see the effects. This is pattern repeated throughout the data. I'm sure the abstinence education folks are well meaning but the end result is more sick teens, more unwanted pregnancies and more abortions.


Now there is blame to be shared - the gay community in particular has moved away from emphasizing barriers. Here in Atlanta I have actually seen "bareback parties" advertised. It would not surprise me to find that is also a problem California. Many of these men are also active with girls or women so it effect the larger population.

But in the end - one of the cheapest things we can do to reduce healthcare costs and abortions is to make barriers freely and widely available.

[Campion]

In contrast, here is a graph from the 2004 report - you can already see the effects. This is pattern repeated throughout the data. I'm sure the abstinence education folks are well meaning but the end result is more sick teens, more unwanted pregnancies and more abortions.

Correlation is not causality. Tell us, are STD rates trending up in California as well?

[Campion]

Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.

What kind of "Gospel" promotes and enables the sin of fornication, with the excuse that "kids are going to do it anyway"?

Certainly not the Christian one.

[gondramB]

>> What kind of “Gospel” promotes and enables the sin of fornication, with the excuse that “kids are going to do it anyway”?

Certainly not the Christian one.<<

I’m promoting safety, health and less abortions.

Until Roe v Wade is reversed we should do other things to reduce the number of abortions.

Birth control is least expensive method of reducing abortions.

[gondramB]

>>Correlation is not causality. Tell us, are STD rates trending up in California as well?<<

Yes. Chlamydia began to rise in California in the late 90's buck the overall national trend toward decreased STD's

But, like the rest of the nation Syphilis and gonorrhea had been trending downward until 2000.



I do agree with Mrs. Don-o that it looks like there are some California specific factors.

[Mrs. Don-o]

First, your chart shows nothing about causation; even the suggestion of correlation is weak.

Second, the study I referred to, published 2 months ago in the Californian Journal of Health Promotion --- the one reporting 1.1 million new cases of sexually-transmitted infections among young people in California in 2005 --- is certainly underatated. Study author Dr. Petra Jerman told Medical News Today that the statistics revealed an epidemic of which, like an iceberg, only a small part is visible.

The authors acknowledged that their figures are underestimated because of incomplete screening of sexually active young people, and failure to confirm the effectiveness of treatment through follow-up testing.

Moreover, their figures reflected infection rates for chlamydia, gonorrhea, HPV and HIV, while yours, unless I'm mistaken, are only for syphilis, by far the least common of the STI's.

I assume that if the full range of STI's are underreported in California, as Dr. Jerman says, they're even LESS accurately reportd in other states, many of which don't even have uniform county-by-county reporting requirements.

Here's a world map of adult HIV prevalence. I would hesitate to make any generalizations based on the map, but I will note one thing I don't see: any consistent correlation between countries with the lowest rates of HIV infection (green on the map) and a high prevalence of the type of "modern, comprehensive" sex education pical of Europe and the USA.

[Palladin]

So true. Wish we could return to those simpler times and practices.

[Palladin]

So good to know that Jansenism is alive and well.

[Tunehead54]

Bump! ;-)