Lee Vs.Coburn – “should the Federal Government Fund Comprehensive Sex Education?”

Lee Vs.Coburn – “should the Federal Government Fund Comprehensive Sex Education?”

Over the last several years, Congress has emphasized funding abstinence-only programs over comprehensive sex education. The government is pouring millions of money into these programs when there is no real evidence that these programs are working. There is no support of science in these programs. By contrast, Comprehensive sex and health programs have been shown to postpone sex and improve contraception use. Students who have comprehensive sex education know more and feel better prepared to handle different situations and decisions than those who have not. "The federal government should fund comprehensive sex education because abstinence–only programs' are unproductive with the students; youth need more comprehensive sex education programs that address both abstinence and family planning information, which includes teaching classes that discuss sexually transmitted diseases and contraception.

Barbara lee Mentions in her article, "Since 1982, the U.S. government has spent more than $1 billion on unproven abstinence-only until marriage programs, with $620 million of that spent between 1998 and 2004". Keith Daily, a spokesman for Ohio Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland adds, "The governor supports abstinence education, what he does not support is abstinence-only education. We are asking to put the money toward abstinence in the context of comprehensive age-appropriate curriculum" (qtd. in Rob Stein).

Barbara Lee also declares that, "Research has repeatedly found that abstinence programs do not work. More than a dozen states also have evaluated their abstinence-only programs, and not a single one has documented successful behavioral impacts". These abstinence programs will end up having serious consequences by denying young people the information that is out there, that they need to protect themselves.

Tom Coburn believes, "Abstinence education works. Since federal funding for abstinence programs began in the late 1990's, the percentage of teens reporting that they are abstinent has steadily increased". Most abstinence programs have the youth take virginity pledges; research has shown that many youths still have sex before marriage. Barbara Lee agrees that "These programs contain medically inaccurate information, are prohibited from talking about the benefits of contraception and convey specific religious messages to the point".

Tom Coburn has a different point of view:

The fact is abstinence education is comprehensive sex education. Abstinence education is honest with teens about the consequences of premarital activity and empowers teens to make the healthiest choice-abstaining from sex until they are in a lifelong, monogamous relationship.

Barbara Lee proclaims, "We know what works: a comprehensive approach to sex education that includes instruction on both abstinence and contraception". Barbara Lee also comments that "Abstinence-only-until-married programs do not have a monopoly on helping young people abstain".

Tom Coburn illustrates saying:

We don't tell teens to smoke a little. We tell them not to smoke. We don't tell them to not drink and to never drink and drive. We tell them to not drink and to never drive. We don't tell teens to use narcotics in moderation. We tell them to "just say no to drugs". Our message on sex should be consistent".

It's the youth of today that need to know all the facts about sex and that includes contraception. These kids may make their pledges to be abstinent, but what about at times when their emotions get out of hand and one thing leads to another? It's better to be safe than sorry then end up conceiving a child. "Comprehensive sex education programs have been shown to postpone sex and improve contraception use when teens have sex" (Lee). Though Barbara Lee also admits "While detractors like to argue that these programs only serve to increase teen sex, the research has found the opposite: These programs do not increase sexual activity at all, nor do they result in more sexual partners".

Tom Coburn claims "Abstinence is the only approach that is 100 percent effective. Condoms do not provide effective protection against human papillomarvirus (HPV)" Tom Coburn also proclaims, "The use of the term "comprehensive" by condom advocates may be good public relations, but is misleading". There is nothing on the market of contraceptives that is 100%