BIRDS AND BEES IN THE TWENTY-FIRST
CENTURY
As a physician and mother (grandmother,
great-grandmother) I have had frequent occasions to ponder about teen-aged
sexuality. I speak in those capacities, not as a representative of the Board of
Education.
The recent controversy about condom
distribution in schools is in danger of obscuring the major issue, which is
appropriate sex education for young people. There is wide-spread concern about
certain social changes--teenage sexual freedom, pregnancies, and sexually
transmitted diseases; also a general feeling that the "sexual
revolution" is undermining our society's values. There is understandably a wish to apportion
blame for these changes--in the current debate, the use and availability of
conception control, including condoms, is considered responsible for these
effects. A moment's reflection should
help us to recall that unintended pregnancy is scarcely a new phenomenon, nor
is teen-aged sexual activity. I grew up in the 1930's, and we had our share of
girls who were forced to drop out of school and whose lives were irretrievably
warped by too youthful and unsupported child-bearing. Fortunately now we
consider our young women's education too important to exclude them from school
in the event of pregnancy, much as we might wish for these events not to have
occurred.
Indeed, our current popular culture and
the ever-intrusive and uninhibited media contribute to the fixation on sexual
gratification to the exclusion of other values, but this again is not caused by
sex education. Such education, backed by
full access to contraceptive and sexually transmitted disease information and
services should include emphasis on abstinence, and even then may not
significantly decrease sexual activity, but neither
will the refusal to provide this information and service. In this area, as in most of life, accurate
knowledge is a prerequisite to responsible choice.
That being said, I am in full agreement
with those who promote an abstinence emphasis in the education of teenagers. Unfortunately, the current
emphasis on and governmental support of an "abstinence-only"
curriculum gives young people inadequate resources to navigate the turbulence
of adolescent life. If we fail to recognize that many will not accept
the abstinence message, are we unwittingly failing in the opportunity for
"damage control"? After all, if I tell my
child not to drink, but he or she goes to a party where drinking
"happens", will I refuse to go out regardless of the hour and drive
him or her and friends home?
We are indeed fortunate to have an
excellent program in our Middle School health curriculum, titled Values and
Choices, which is very complete in its presentation of adolescent physical
and emotional changes and challenges, and in providing practical tools for
dealing with the inevitable dilemmas of those turbulent years. In these materials it is made entirely clear
that abstinence is the ideal and the norm, but that young people will make
independent decisions and deserve the fullest possible knowledge for making
these decisions.
I appreciate the offer of the Care-Net
organization to assist in our sexuality education teaching, but I think we
would be teaching only half of the needed materials if we used their
abstinence-based curriculum.
As far as the distribution of condoms in
the high school is concerned, I recognize and applaud the effort of the young
people in making their study and presentation. I also recognize the discomfort
of many of the folks who have written to school administrators and board
members in opposition to such a program. I think we can in general agree that
following up on our middle school program with age-appropriate more detailed
sex education in the high school, still with emphasis on abstinence as an ideal
choice, is the first priority.
Incidentally, the Planned Parenthood
Clinic in
Mary Frantz, M.D.
160