Wisconsin’s Approach to Sex Education: An Ineffective and Outdated Practice
Photo by Pixabay from Pexels.
Hayden Hockerman
Sex education is the teaching of safe sex, STDs, and healthy relationships. However, this curriculum is failing teenagers. A study was done between the years 2002 and 2014 on teenagers' knowledge about human sexuality and HIV/STDs. The percentage of students who learned about sexualities dropped from 67 percent to 49 percent, a 19 percent decrease. Furthermore, knowledge about HIV prevention went from 64 to 41 percent, a 23 percent decrease.
Generally, most schools adopt abstinence-only programs because they are federally funded and having comprehensive sex education is controversial. This is because parents of students may believe school is not an appropriate place for sex education to be taught or talked about, but abstinence-only programs do more harm than good. For example, it adds to the stigma around sex, may make teenagers feel shameful regarding sexual activity, may portray homosexuals as deviant, and sometimes withholds important sexual health knowledge. It also does not reach its goal of reducing teenage pregnancy and STD rates or decreasing teenagers’ sexual activity. In 2007, a nine-year national legislative body of the U.S. mandated study took place. It found that students who were in abstinence-only programs did not change their sexual behavior. There was no difference in the mean age of those who did engage in sexual behavior or number of sexual encounters. In states where the same study was conducted, similar results were also found. They also found that states with abstinence-only programs had higher rates of teen pregnancy.
However, it is not just pregnancy rates that are concerning. STD cases like syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia are on the rise in teenagers. The CDC estimates that people between the age of 15-24 make up half the STD population. In addition, “The American Academy of Pediatrics” found from a youth risk behavior survey that “only 9% of sexually active high school students report using both a condom for STI prevention and a more effective form of birth control to prevent pregnancy.” This shows that a large majority of sexually active teens are not as prepared and safe for sex as they should be.
Pregnancy rates and STD rates under abstinence-only education are just some of the many problems that abstinence-only education forms. There are many more. For example, it may portray harmful gender stereotypes. It also has a severe lack of diversity. Abstinence-only education generally revolves around a white, cis, and heterosexual audience. This contributes to others' feelings of shame around their bodies, sexual orientation, and identity.
Lastly, it may be helpful to hear an inside perspective on abstinence-only education. Karren Torres, a youth activist, had little to no sex education throughout her entire k-12 education. She states, when describing her memories of her high school curriculum, “There were two cardboard bears, and a person explained that one bear wears a bikini to the beach, and the other bear wears shorts—that is the closest thing I ever got to sex ed throughout my entire k-12 education.” She also describes how significant that moment stuck with her because she believes her education failed to teach her about relationships, her body, and more. It became even more evident after she was sexually assaulted; she was never taught the warning signs of abuse in a sexual relationship or taught how to ask for help. This is one of many voices of students who were taught little to nothing in abstinence-only education and how it hurts them. Torres’s story highlights the flaws in abstinence-only education.
Wisconsin’s current sex education curriculum is abstinence-only. The content requirements for sex education in this state include stressing abstinence and teaching the importance of sex only within marriage. HIV education must include stressing abstinence but does not require condoms (how to use, what they are, etc). Regarding life skills on sexual content, Wisconsin is only mandated to teach dating and sexual violence prevention. It is not required to teach healthy relationships, sexual decision making and self-discipline, consent, and refusal skills and personal boundaries.
Statistics as of 2021.
Above is a chart showing different states and what their requirements are for their sex education curriculum. An “X” means that it teaches that specific lesson in the curriculum. It also includes the teenage pregnancy rate of each state as of 2021. Clearly visible in the chart, states that stress abstinence (like Alabama and Arkansas) and teach the importance of sex only within marriage typically have the highest teenage pregnancy rate. There is a significant difference in the teenage pregnancy rate in states that only cover abstinence and teach about contraception (like Vermont and California). The main difference between stressing abstinence and covering it is the emphasis the curriculum places on abstinence. Stressing it emphasizes abstinence more, and it is more repetitive throughout the sex education curriculum. Meanwhile, covering it means it may be brought up once or twice.
Wisconsin should modify its curriculum to a comprehensive sex education because it will help benefit teenagers in schools in a variety of ways. This is crucial to lowering Wisconsin’s teenage pregnancy rate. As of 2021, the teenage pregnancy rate for Wisconsin was 10.1%, showing that the current curriculum is ineffective (as stated before, this state stresses abstinence and teaches the importance of sex only within marriage). Wisconsin needs comprehensive sex education not only to lower the teenage pregnancy rate but also to lower teenage STD/STI rates. As stated before, the CDC estimates that people between the age of 15-24 make up half the STD population. This is further proof that abstinence-only education is doing a horrific job of helping its students. Abstinence-only education is doing the exact opposite of what it intends. If teenagers are gonna engage in sexual activity, no matter what they’re taught in school, they should be taught how to be safe in sexual activity. Comprehensive sex education is the best method of sex education in schools and should be taught instead of abstinence-only education.
Sources:
Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Programs: Harmful and Ineffective | Guttmacher Institute
Abstinence Only Education is a Failure | Columbia Public Health
Advocating for Sex Education in Your Community
Abstinence Education Programs: Definition, Funding, and Impact on Teen Sexual Behavior | KFF
Stats of the State - Teen Birth Rates
