By Cheryl Mattox Berry
Would the U.S. Centers for Disease Control call lawmakers in states with an abstinence-only sex education policy and tell them that their stringent laws won’t solve the teen pregnancy problem.
Exhibit A: CDC researchers attribute a decline in teen births to messages about sexual practices, use of contraceptives and greater awareness of the negative effects of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Sex education, take a bow. Applause. Applause. Knowledge has a made a difference, but the numbers are still too high.
A CDC study released last week found that the number of teens in the USA giving birth dropped 9 percent between 2009 and 2010 – an all-time low. The current teen birth rate is about 34 births per 1,000 girls ages 15 through 19. That number represents a 44 percent decrease in the birth rate since 1991. Researchers noted that there’s still plenty of sexual activity, such as oral sex, mutual masturbation and other things that don’t result in pregnancies.
Given the new teen birth statistics, why would any state prohibit comprehensive sex education, which includes anatomy, reproduction, sexual behavior, contraceptives, sexually transmitted diseases and abstinence? Of 37 states that mandate all sex education include information on abstinence, 26 require that abstinence be taught as the main method of pregnancy prevention. Studies show that comprehensive sex education delays sexual intercourse among teens and reduces pregnancy at a greater rate than an abstinence-only curriculum. However, a 2010 study published in the journal Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine found that abstinence education can delay sex among teens.
In Tennessee, lawmakers recently proposed adding language to the state’s abstinence-only sex education curriculum that requires teachers to warn students about “gateway sexual activity,” including kissing, hand-holding, cuddling and anything that could lead to sex. The measure was in response to complaints about sex education lessons in some schools that mentioned alternatives to intercourse.
How can you tell teens with raging hormones not to hold hands, hug or kiss? That’s unrealistic and unnatural. Instead of turning back the clock to the Dark Ages, it’s time to think of creative ways to teach teens about human sexuality and birth control. Lawmakers and schools should also recognize that sex education is not just about clamping down on behavior that they think will lead to pregnancy. It’s about showing girls the kind of life they could have if they don’t get pregnant before marriage. There should be a greater emphasis on career development, helping girls identify in middle school what they want to do with their lives. Next, show them how they can achieve their goals and give them the tools to make their dreams a reality.
If all a girl sees is her neighbors and girlfriends with babies, why would she think her life could be different? I tell teens in my workshops that they are responsible for their own happiness. Girls can’t depend on boys to give them the emotional support that they don’t get at home. I warn girls to be suspicious of boys who start buying them clothes and jewelry because they will want something in return – sex. In response to that age-old statement, “If you love me, you would,” I tell girls to flip the script with this statement: “If you love me, you wouldn’t ask me to do anything that would ruin my future.”
The last piece to the puzzle of how to prevent teen pregnancy is mentors, who play a vital role in keeping girls focused on their life’s goals. Mentors can have honest discussions with girls about boys and sex, subjects they may not feel comfortable discussing with their mothers and grandmothers. There’s still much work to be done. Let’s keep the dialogue going about the best ways to keep our girls from becoming mothers too soon.