It seems like abstinence only is going to be history.
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/12/28/obama-s-smart-sex-education-funding.aspx
First, notice it says nothing about “comprehensive” or “abstinence-only,” which has long been the fault line in sex education. Either you teach how to use contraceptives, or you teach students that sexual abstinence until marriage is the expected standard. But instead of becoming embroiled in this longstanding debate (one that, to be honest, has little chance of being resolved any time soon), this budget does a smart side step. It basically says "what matters most isn’t what you teach, but the results that you get." Abstinence-only, abstinence-plus, abstinence-centered, or comprehensive: any of these programs would be able to compete for funds as long as they can prove that they work. Which, at the end of the day, gets sex education focused on what most Americans want: reducing pregnancies and reducing sexually transmitted infections.
Second, the program has a nice breakdown between funds for proven programs and research. Which I think is indicative of what we’re going to see in the larger scheme of health-care reform in the Obama era: mostly funding things that are proven to work but also a significant budget for things that might work. In this case, that means spending a quarter of the budget researching “innovative strategies.”
* * *
In the case of sex education, better methods are most definitely needed: at best, only two thirds of comprehensive sex-education programs reduce just one risk factor (like the rate of teen pregnancy or of contraceptives use). Meanwhile, the past two years have seen an uptick in teen pregnancies. Most of us can agree both of these areas are ones where we could stand to see improvement. And, hopefully, with ideological battles sidestepped, we will.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
