(06/20/11 12:00am)
I am not often in favor of cutting things from education. It is normally my policy to cut elsewhere, raise taxes or do anything to stop education cuts. There is one program however that I am all in favor of losing.
Sex education in Arizona is abysmal and expensive.
Title V is the abstinence-only-until-marriage legislation that the federal government uses to distribute federal funding. It states that for a state to receive funding, the program must: have as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity; teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increase vulnerability to sexual advances, among other requirements.
In the language of Title V, the state must come up with three for every four of the government’s dollars. Which means in 2008 when Arizona received $1,034,776 from the federal government, the state was required to come up with $776,082. According to SEICUS, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United Sates, Arizona spent $1.5 million. So, all told, the state and federal government combined spent nearly 3 million dollars on abstinence-only education.
Now lets look at the state of Washington. Washington ranks No. 35 in the nation in teen pregnancy rates while Arizona hovers between third and fourth. Clearly Washington is doing something right.
Let’s start with similarities. Washington and Arizona both have optional programs, neither state requires its schools to teach sex education at all, and they both have almost identical populations — about 6.5 million. Both states require approval from local communities — in Washington, parents and local groups must be involved, and in Arizona, sex education curriculum must be approved by the local governing board.
The biggest difference between Arizona and Washington is still their teen pregnancy rates. Washington law requires schools that do teach sexual education to include accurate medical information about STDs, HIV/AIDS and contraception options for those who are sexually active. Also, it is written into legislation that “[a]bstinence may not be taught to the exclusion of other materials and instruction on contraceptives and disease prevention.”
Perhaps this is what makes Arizona's sex education so ineffective and expensive. The state spent $1.5 million on a program that doesn't work. In economic times like these, does that make any sense?
“Abstinence-only education is grossly ineffective,” said Lance Heisler, a sexuality studies student at ASU.
“It is human nature to procreate,” he said. “But with the current generation’s bodies maturing earlier than ever before, the teenage mind does not have a chance to catch up in maturity. If we do not educate children on the risks and responsibilities of sex then we are not only grossly irresponsible, we are hurting future generations to come.”
Heisler supports abstinence-plus education, the program Washington uses. Abstinence-plus promotes abstinence as the best option, but teaches children about diseases and the risks that come with sexual activity, and how to protect themselves from those risks.
There are numerous studies that show abstinence-only education does not work. A study done by Mathematica, a research group, states “None of the individual programs had statistically significant impacts on the rate of sexual abstinence, whether measured as either always remaining abstinent or being abstinent during the last 12 months.”
This study, authorized by Congress, followed 2,000 kids from middle school to high school in four communities, two urban and two rural. Just more than half of those students received abstinence education. By the end of the study, both groups had a 50 percent abstinence rate.
So why does the federal government keep funding it? Why do states keep wasting millions of tax dollars on a program that has a zero percent success rate?
There is plenty about Arizona sex education that is disturbing, but what disturbs me the most is the total waste of money. These programs are ineffective, and may in fact be costing us money.
This program is not teaching teens about sex, but that does not mean teens aren’t having sex. Ignorance leads to ridiculous myths like you can't get pregnant if you're a virgin, if you're standing up or if you pull out, just to name a few.
And that's how you become the state with the fourth highest rate of teen pregnancy. So what happens to those unplanned children? Well, the mother terminates the pregnancy, keeps the child or gives it up for adoption. In 2006, Arizona spent 289 million dollars of taxpayer money to pay for the costs of unintended pregnancies.
This is unacceptable.
Arizona has to reform its antiquated stance on sex education and save itself a ton of money.
Reach the columnist at omcquarr@asu.edu