A
newly released, nationally representative poll conducted by Zogby
International shows that American parents overwhelmingly support
the themes and messages of abstinence education programs. On many
themes, parental support is nearly unanimous. By contrast, parents
overwhelmingly reject the main messages in safe sex or
"comprehensive sex-ed" curricula. Specifically, the poll shows
that:
- Some 79 percent of parents want teens to
be taught that they should not engage in sexual activity until they
are married or at least in an adult relationship leading to
marriage.
- Some 91 percent of parents want teens to
be taught that "the best choice is for sexual intercourse to be
linked to love, intimacy, and commitment. These qualities are most
likely to occur in a faithful marriage."
- Some 68 percent of parents want sex
education programs to teach that "individuals who are not sexually
active until they are married have the best chances of marital
stability and happiness."
- 91 percent of parents want schools to
teach that "adolescents should be expected to abstain from sexual
activity during high school years."
These themes are central to abstinence
education curricula. Abstinence programs teach the following
tenets: Human sexuality is primarily emotional and psychological,
not physical, in nature; in proper circumstances, sexual activity
leads to long-term emotional bonding between two individuals; and
sexual happiness is inherently linked to intimacy, love, and
commitment--qualities found primarily within marriage.
Abstinence programs strongly encourage
abstinence throughout the teen years, and preferably until
marriage. They teach that casual sex at an early age not only poses
grave threats of pregnancy and infection by sexually transmitted
diseases, but also can undermine an individual's capacity to build
loving, intimate relationships as an adult. The programs therefore
encourage teen abstinence as a preparation and pathway to healthy
adult marriage. Additional poll questions show strong parental
support for these themes.
Parents Reject
"Comprehensive Sexuality Education"
In contrast to abstinence programs, comprehensive sex-ed curricula
are focused almost exclusively on teaching about contraception and
encouraging teens to use it. These curricula neither discourage nor
criticize teen sexual activity as long as "protection" is used. In
general, they exhibit an acceptance of casual teen sex and do not
encourage teens to wait until they are older to initiate sexual
activity. For example, these curricula do not encourage teens to
abstain until they have finished high school. "Protected" sex at an
early age and sex with many different partners are not treated as
problems. Sexuality is presented primarily as a physical
phenomenon; the main message is to use condoms to prevent the
physical problems of sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy.
The vital linkages between sexuality, love, intimacy, and
commitment are ignored. There is no implication that sex is best
within marriage.
The new poll reveals that parents
overwhelmingly oppose the messages contained within comprehensive
sex-ed curricula. For example:
- Comprehensive sex-ed curricula focus
almost exclusively on contraception and include little or no
material on abstinence. However, only 2 percent of parents believe
abstinence is not important; only 7 percent believe teaching about
contraception should have more emphasis than teaching about
abstinence.
- Over 90 percent of parents want sex
education programs to teach teens to abstain at least until they
have finished high school. Comprehensive sex-ed programs do not
contain this message, and much of their material implicitly
undermines it.
- Comprehensive sex-ed programs convey the
clear message that teen sexual activity is okay as long as
contraception is used; only 7 percent of parents agree with that
message.
Government
Spending Does Not Match Parental Priorities The new poll
shows that 85 percent of parents believe that teaching about
abstinence should be emphasized as much as, or more than, teaching
about contraception. Only 8 percent believe that promoting
contraception is more important. Regrettably, government spending
priorities directly contradict parental priorities. Currently, the
government spends at least $4.50 promoting teen contraceptive use
for every $1.00 spent to promote teen abstinence.
The
new poll shows an apparent divergence between abstinence education
and parental attitudes in only one area: Some 75 percent of parents
want the schools to teach teens about both abstinence and
contraception. Abstinence curricula in general do not teach about
contraceptive use, except to explain contraceptive failure rates.
However, schools that teach about abstinence usually also teach the
basic biological facts about reproduction and contraception in a
separate class such as health. This arrangement has widespread
parental support. Some 56.4 percent of parents believe that
abstinence and contraception should not be taught in the same
class. This figure includes 21.7 percent who believe that
contraceptive use should not be taught at all and another 35
percent who believe abstinence and contraception should both be
taught, but in separate classes. Only 39.9 percent of parents
believe that abstinence and contraception should be taught together
in the same class.
Overall
Findings
Parents show strong (in many cases, nearly unanimous) support for
the major themes of abstinence education. Overall, the values and
objectives of the overwhelming majority of parents can be met by
providing teens with a strong abstinence program while teaching
basic biological information about contraception in a separate
health or biology class. This arrangement appears to be common in
schools where abstinence is taught.
By
contrast, only a tiny minority (less than 10 percent) of parents
support the values and messages taught in comprehensive sex-ed
curricula. Since the themes of these courses (such as "It's okay
for teens to have sex as long as they use condoms") contradict and
undermine the basic values parents want taught, these courses
should be deemed unacceptable, even if combined with other
materials.
Robert E. Rector is Senior Research
Fellow in Domestic Policy, Melissa G. Pardue is Harry and Jeanette
Weinberg Fellow in Social Welfare Policy, and Shannan Martin is
Research Assistant in Welfare Policy at The Heritage
Foundation.