Negative Effects Of Abstinence Centered Programs

Among the most developed countries, America has the worst sex education programs. The abstinence-centered programs used are insufficient and can be detrimental to youth’s psychological health. Unlike abstinence programs, comprehensive sex education programs teach students responsible and healthy sexual behavior along with healthy relationships with parents, peers, and friends. The only type of sex education that is federally funded is abstinence-centered programs. The United State’s current sex education system needs to be more consistent and sufficient for today’s time because it is outdated and can have a harmful effect on youth’s health.

Not only are abstinence centered programs insufficient, they are often wrong and can be harmful to a

Students can rarely learn personal aspects from these sources like the value of consent or healthy relationships. Although the internet contains valuable sources on topics such as these, it is unlikely that teens spend their time on sexual health forums. Many teens go on social media and see unrealistic expectations of relationships, especially those exemplified in porn. Young adults see these relationships and gain improper views about relationship expectations. Problems arise when these views are not corrected, which then can lead to misuse of others. Parents are reluctant to let their children make their own choices, but it is adults who are to blame for denying their children adequate sex education: so many young people have an inadequate conception of consent (Hanson). Teens must be taught these concepts among others before they become sexually active to ensure the safety of themselves and their

In both countries, people become sexually active around the age of 17. Starting at a younger age, sex education in the Netherlands explores relationships and love, and how sexuality relates. Amy Schalet, the associate professor of sociology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, says that young people need a form of comprehensive sex education that views sexuality “as a positive part of life that they can relate to in a positive way.” Schalet compares sex education between the US and the Netherlands, noting that the Dutch leave room for young men to be romantic and have feelings, and for young women to have choices. American culture can put shame on men showing feelings, making them appear vulnerable. Typically, girls are told to be wary of boys who can use them. Schalet suggests that gender stereotypical ideas in youth can have a negative impact on sexual health. In the Netherlands, parents focus on their children being ready, “they self-regulate their sexual activity.” The Dutch community focuses on acceptance of adolescent sexuality and easy access to contraceptives. Dutch homes are open and accepting to sex. Many parents have conversations about sex in the home, and children don’t have to feel ashamed for asking questions (Weisman). These ideas about education for adolescents are much more effective than scare