Sex Education in Utah: Ciara Blankenfeld - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Sex Education in Utah:

Ciara Blankenfeld

Method

Background

Utah’s Legislation

Past Experience. An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare participants who received sex education in Utah to those who received education out of state in abstinence-only and comprehensive content. Those who received sex education in Utah were more likely to be taught abstinence only content (i.e. sex only within marriage, sex outside of marriage will have harmful consequences) (M=4.44, SD=.94) compared to those who received education outside of the state (M=4.11, SD=1.01); t(171)=2.20, p=.029. There was significantly less comprehensive content taught (i.e. contraception use, abortion, sexual orientation) to those who received sex education in Utah (M=3.42, SD=1.27) compared to those who received out of state sex education (M=4.30, SD=1.25); t(171)=-4.59, p<.001. However, both groups did not feel they received adequate sex education (M=2.98, SD=1.98; M=2.96, SD=2.09). Men and woman differed significantly on perceived adequacy of their sex education, with woman feeling they received less adequate education (M=2.8, SD=1.95) compared to how adequate men perceived their education (M=3.59, SD=2.10); t(269), p=.007.Parental Involvement. Utah residents and non residents agreed that schools should have sex education programs (M=6.29, SD=1.13; M=6.43, SD=.889.). Utah residents felt more strongly about parents being involved in educating their children about sex (M=6.51, SD 1.01) compared to non residents (M=6.22, SD=1.13); t(269)=2.08, p=.038. Future Education. An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare Utah residents to non residents in attitudes toward future sex education content. Utah residents were found to be in favor of having more comprehensive content in future sex education programs (M=6.07, SD=.94). However, Utah residents desired to also include abstinence content in future programs (M=5.17, SD=1.09), which differed significantly from non residents (M=4.61,SD=.97); t260(3.94)=, p<.001.

References

Bernick, B. (2016). Poll: Utahns Want Comprehensive Sex-Ed Instead of Abstinence Only. Utah Policy. Retrieved October 15, 2016 from http://utahpolicy.com/index.php/features/today-at-utah-policy/8582-poll-utahns-want-comprehensive-sex- ed-instead-of-abstinence-onlyCenter for Disease Control (2016). Sexual Risk Behaviors: HIV, STD, & Teen Pregnancy Prevention. Retrieved February 14, 2017 from https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/sexualbehaviors/Guttmacher Institute (2016). Sex and HIV Education. State Policies in Brief. Retrieved September 14, 2016 from http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SE.pdfGresle´-Favie, C. (2013). Adult discrimination against children: the case of abstinence-only education in twenty-first century USA. Sex Education, Vol. 13, 715-725.Grossman, J. M., Tracy, A. J., Charmaraman, L., Ceder, I., & Erkut, S. (2014). Protective Effects of Middle School Comprehensive Sex Education with Family Involvement. Journal Of School Health, 84(11), 739-747Kirby, D. (2007). Abstinence, Sex, and STD/HIV Education Programs for Teens: Their Impact on Sexual Behavior, Pregnancy, and Sexually Transmitted Disease. Annual Review Of Sex Research, 18(1), 143-177.Malone, P., & Rodriguez, M. (2011). Comprehensive Sex Education vs. Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs. Human Rights, Vol. 38, 5-22.National Conference of State Legislatures. (2016). State Policies on Sex Education in Schools. Retrieved September 21, 2016 from http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-policies-on-sex-education-in-schools.aspx#1Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Inc. (2016). Sex education. Retrieved September 14, 2016, from http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/sex-education/Trenholm, C., Devaney, B., Fortson, K., Quay, K., Wheeler, J., & Clark, M. (2007). Impacts of Four Title V, Section 510 Abstinence Education Programs. Final Report. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.Waxman, H. (2004). The content of federally funded abstinence-only education programs. Washington, DC: US House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform—Minority Staff Special Investigations Division http://oversight. house. gov/documents/20041201102153-50247. pdf.

The objective of the present study is to assess the attitudes about sexual education among Utah residents and whether these attitudes reflect state legislation. The study anonymously surveyed 309 participants with a 47 item questionnaire that consisted of demographic questions such as age, gender, and religious and political affiliation, as well as questions regarding the participant’s experiences with sexuality education and their attitudes toward future sex education legislation that were rated on a Likert-type scale. The study also assesses the level of understanding participants have about sexuality in relation to parental involvement and the type of sexual education received.

Experiences with and attitudes towards abstinence-only curriculum

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) (2016) found that in 2014, 249,078 babies were born to 15-19-year-old woman.  The CDC has also found that the U.S. has a substantially higher teen pregnancy rate compared to other industrialized nations. Teen pregnancy has accounted for “$9.4 billion in costs to U.S. taxpayers for increased health care and foster care, increased incarceration rates among children of teen parents, and lost tax revenue because of lower educational attainment and income among teen mothers” (CDC). The issue of teen contraction of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) is also at a high rate today in the U.S. (CDC, 2016). 22% of HIV diagnoses in the U.S. are adolescents 13-24 (CDC). Adolescents 15-24 report 10 million STIs each year (CDC). Many conservative states offer students abstinence-only sex education, where other more liberal states have moved towards comprehensive programs (Malone & Rodriguez). The Department of Health and Human Services “provides $50 million per year to fund… abstinence-only education in states” (Planned Parenthood, 2016).    

Currently, 27 states require that abstinence be “stressed” (Guttmacher Institute, 2016, p. 2) where only 19 states require information on condoms and contraception (Guttmacher Institute, p. 3). There are several states that do not require medical accuracy in teaching sexuality to students (Guttmacher Institute, p. 4). Utah at present regulates sexual education curriculum to ensure there is medical accuracy and that information is culturally appropriate and unbiased (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2016). Nonetheless, Utah does not include information about condoms or contraception and requires that abstinence be stressed (Guttmacher Institute, pp. 2-3). Utah is also one of three states that requires parental consent for a student to participate in sex and HIV education. In February 2016, a Utah bill proposed a comprehensive curriculum that would provide evidence-based information on all methods for preventing pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, and sexual violence (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2016) The bill failed to pass, although a survey conducted by Dan Jones & Associates found that 64% of Utahns are in favor of Comprehensive Sexuality Education (Bernick, 2016).

A report on abstinence-only education programs found that over 80% of abstinence-only curricula contains “false, misleading, or distorted information about reproductive health” (Waxman, 2004, i). Namely, that abstinence-only education had misleading information about the effectiveness of contraception and the risks of abortion as well as several scientific inaccuracies (Waxman, 2004, i-ii). Supporters of abstinence-only education desire teens to remain abstinent until marriage by instructing students that “abstinence is the only completely effective form of birth control and the only way to completely avoid the risk of sexually of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)” (Malone & Rodriguez, 2011).

Abstinence-only programs are characterized as teaching: “sexual abstinence before marriage as the only means of preventing unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). As for contraception/ protection (birth control or condoms), this is only alluded to underline the failure rates of these methods” (Gresle’-Favier, 2013, p.715)

Comprehensive programs are described as “teaching not only about abstinence, but also contraception, including emergency contraception; reproductive choice; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT), and questioning issues; as well as. . .anatomy; development; puberty; relationships; and all of the other issues one would expect to be covered in a traditional sexuality education class” (Malone & Rodriguez, 2011).

The implications of this research are to inform future research and Utah policy makers. The majority of Utahn’s did not believe they received adequate sex education and are in favor of expanding the current abstinence-only curriculum into a comprehensive program.

Results

Furthermore, comprehensive sexuality education should be science-based and medically accurate (Malone & Rodriguez, 2011). A study conducted by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (2007) on the effectiveness of abstinence-only education found that “there was no strong evidence that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs delay the initiation of sexual intercourse, hasten the return to abstinence, or reduce the number of sexual partners” (Trenholm, Devaney, Fortson, Quay, Wheeler, & Clark, xvii). Additionally, a meta-evaluation of 54 studies measuring the impact of sex education programs, conducted by Dr. Douglas Kirby, (2007) found comparable results on the efficacy of abstinence-only education. However, Kirby’s study also examined the efficacy of comprehensive sex education and found that it achieved three important effects: 1) delaying the initiation of sexual intercourse , 2) reducing the number of sexual partners, 3) increasing condom or contraceptive use (Kirby, pp. 158-159). A nationwide survey conducted by Kohler, Manhart, & Lafferty (2008)  for the National Center for Health Statistics found that 62% adolescents had received comprehensive sex education, which was significantly associated with deferred sexual intercourse and lower teen pregnancy rates. This study also found that:

It was hypothesized that this study would replicate the results of Dan Jones’(2016) survey of Utahns’ opinions of sexuality education, and the National Center for Health Statistics’ (2008) findings of the efficacy of abstinence-only education.

The average age for participants was 26 years old (M = 26.24; SD = 9.621) with a range of 18 to 67 years of age76.8 of respondents were female55.6% of respondents were Mormon69.4% of respondents were registered to vote in Utah

abstinence-only education was also significantly associated with deferral of intercourse and was more effective than no sexual education at all. However, abstinence-only education had a lower rate of contraceptive use, resulting in a higher unplanned pregnancy rate compared to adolescents who received comprehensive education (Kohler, Manhart, & Lafferty).

Demographics