Reader comments
Lawmaker debates sex ed with teens

Ray is Right! | 5:58 a.m. May 21, 2009

I don't approve of war. Schools should not teach anything about wars to my kids. They are too fragile to handle the truth about any war. These kind of things should be taught only in the home.

dj | 7:21 a.m. May 21, 2009

If you are teaching your children your value system at home, they would not be shaken by the alternate value systems at school. "We don't approve of this, but you can handle hearing about it" speaks more of solid parental instruction.

Middleground? | 7:28 a.m. May 21, 2009

I want my children to understand the anatomical aspects of reproduction, but honestly don't want the state involved in advocating alternatives to what we've already taught them.

Comments continue below

to "Ray is Right" | 7:34 a.m. May 21, 2009

In a real debate, with trained judges, your "war" analogy would lose, for being so exaggerated, and not comparable.
It will only fool those who are already falling for the Planned Parenthood lazy thinking.

John Charity Spring | 8:11 a.m. May 21, 2009

This whole issue is a direct result of the public schools giving in to ideas of so-called political correctness and refusing to teach the values that made this Country into the greatest on Earth: chastity, morality, and self-control.

Educate | 8:49 a.m. May 21, 2009

My children grew up outside of Utah. They were taught in school to postpone sexual activity until marriage, but also birth control. Of course, they were taught at home and church to avoid sexual activity until married.

Rates of unplanned pregnancy has been rising significantly among the poor, which correlates with decreased funding from federal and state sources for reproductive health. Unplanned pregancy among the poor is a national crisis. The negative repercussions of children being born to single mothers lasts for generations, and affects society as a whole. If we want to decrease the number of abortions, crime and poverty we need to restore the funding for these types of programs. Money for these programs was in the Stimulus bill, but stripped out to appease Republicans (who didn't vote for it anyway).

It's Pretty Simple To Me | 8:59 a.m. May 21, 2009

Utah has a pretty good system. Parents can choose to teach their children in their own home and/or allow them to attend a class in school that includes all the options of sex education. However, as long as there is parental consent their should not be restrictions on fully teaching all aspects of both abstinence AND contraception in school. I personally feel parents are fooling themselves and doing their children a disservice if they do not provide both abstinence and contraception education either in the home or allow them to get it at school. But I do believe it should be a parent's choice. I teach my children the virtues of waiting and remaining chaste but would want them to know the necessity of using contraception if they do choose to be sexually active. I am active LDS and believe to do otherwise is burrying my head in the sand and putting my children both at spiritual and temporal risk. But again, I respect all parent's rights to make similar or different decisions about their own children.

Get it right | 9:09 a.m. May 21, 2009

This is not a debate over sex education, I'm sure 99.99% of teenagers know all about sex and its consequences.

This is a debate over Birth Control Education and informing children on how to use and where to get it without parental involment. It is that plain and simple.

Why do we always have to gloss over the real issue in this country.

re: Get it right | 9:35 a.m. May 21, 2009

"Why do we always have to gloss over the real issue in this country."

Because we sit back and let the liberals frame the discussion. It's worked out quite well for them!

Get rid of sex ed in Utah | 9:42 a.m. May 21, 2009

Since the state is more committed to parents rights that to teaching what is most effective, why not scrap teaching sex ed altogther and make it an option or not at all.

Free this class time up for other alternatives, such as math, art, marketing, physics or something.

TO: Educate | 8:49 a.m. | 9:46 a.m. May 21, 2009

Thanks and ditto. I like that you also have a balanced view that allows parents and teachers educating young people in a balanced way.

I was grateful I had a teacher that covered the various forms of contraception. Along with that though, the main point that was emphasized was abstinence is the only sure-fire way to prevent STD's and unplanned pregnancy. I liked this balance. It complemented what my parents and church taught and it made sense. At least that way I had information on both sides of the fence.

@John | 9:48 a.m. May 21, 2009

" the values that made this Country into the greatest on Earth: chastity, morality, and self-control."

Wow! Definitely do NOT take off your rose-colored glasses. You wouldn't like the truth.

Anonymous | 9:54 a.m. May 21, 2009

Saying most kids know about sex...and the consequences is a simplistic point of view.

We have an over abundance of teen pregnancies, std's and heart ache for them and the parents. A lot of stuff gets swept under the rug with pregnancies and quick marriages...

Teaching kids at home is fine, if you are honest, tell it all, and let them know they can come to you in a time of question and need.

HOWEVER< several of my daughter's friends would rather "die" than talk to their parents or even whisper the word sex in their presence..

It is the parents place to be open, esp the Moms.

Personally from what I have seen and heard, it isn't happening...

Sex will not go away just because you don't think it should be discussed..

FACTS NEED TO BE TOLD AND DISCUSSED...somewhere

It's not working | 10:06 a.m. May 21, 2009

Abstinence-based education IS NOT WORKING. The evidence? Look back at the article: "Approximately half of the students surveyed stated they are sexually active."

Abstinence *is* the best way to avoid pregnancy, STDs and all the other problems that come with sexual activity. BUT. It only works if you actually practice abstinence, and the evidence is that many kids don't.

An intelligent program (which is to say, one that we'll never have here) would emphasize abstinence as the best choice, but also provide kids with the information they need to keep safe if they choose, as many clearly do, not to abstain.

Satisfy Everyone & All Concerns | 10:10 a.m. May 21, 2009

Teach self control, chastity, abstence until marriage,

also teach about preventative measures for those teens who will not listen to the above, ... not all people are going to follow this best advice.

If some families object to this, give them the option to opt out.

Let Logic Rule | 10:19 a.m. May 21, 2009

Why teach sex ed at all? If it is to reduce the problems that sex can bring on then ...

Look at the studies and find what works best, leave religion, the desires of the ACLU, politics and all else out of it.

If we are not willing to do this, why teach it at all? it is just a wasted class.

Either do it right, or not at all. Seriously

A Parent | 11:50 a.m. May 21, 2009

Utah's current sex ed program is not working. It is a program that has now been proven, through studies, to be ineffective in reducing teen pregnancy.
I can't do the job of teaching sex ed by myself. Many parents would welcome help from our schools. Rep. Ray should allow a better sex ed program in our schools and let parents opt in if they want their students to participate. It's that simple.
If it ain't broken, don't fix it. But if it is broken (and it is), change it.

Yoho | 11:53 a.m. May 21, 2009

Sex education needs to happen somewhere. I grew up in a strong LDS home where somewhere between church and parental teaching, I learned "Don't have sex outside of marriage....period". The reality is that I grew into adulthood struggling with the realities that most people have some form of sexual contact outside of marriage and that I would also be forced into this position as well. Looking back, I wish that I would have received ALL the information available and trusted to make my own choices based on personal convictions. You can't not teach about sex and birth control options anymore. I learned about condoms after having had sex and reading the package so that the next time I would be prepared. I also learned about STD's after I got one....and it was not from actual intercourse. I learned about sex the old fashioned way, and not under personal choice. I'm not naive anymore. As an adult, I'm a Physician Assistant working in an STD clinic on the East Coast. I start by teaching teenagers the value of personal choice and accountability.

Not a mom yet | 12:22 p.m. May 21, 2009

I grew up outside of Utah and had adequate (and sometimes overboard) sex-ed education. Even with that, there were quite a few unplanned pregnancies among the students, so I would say it all boils down to what they're learning at home. I'm glad I learned all about alternatives to abstinence just in case I would have needed it. As it turned out, though, I also learned the value of self-control and seeing past 10 minutes into the future. I never had an unplanned pregnancy or an STD because I chose to abstain. But if my parents (and church) had not taught me the value of waiting, I may have had sex before marriage. But at least I would have known about condoms and all that.

If you parents would rather take the chance that your child will have some self-control and listen to anything you say and ignore everything plastered all over their social lives without teaching them about alternatives, then be prepared to raise their babies because no 15 year-old girl is equipped to do that responsibly. I, for one, would rather not, so I want my children to learn sex-ed.

Then make it optional | 12:23 p.m. May 21, 2009

Since studies show that Utah's approach isn't working and apparently Utah will not change,

Can sex ed at least be made optional? Free this class time up for some class that actually will provide an education.

Re: It's not working | 12:32 p.m. May 21, 2009

If your evidence is the survey cited in the article then you just lost the debate. The survey is described as unscientific, meaning it was conducted by a 17-year-old girl who asked a handful of her friends whether or not they have sex. I posted a comment on this earlier but the screeners apparently didn't like my critique of Amy K. Stewart's journalistic standards. What we need here is a thorough, objective look at the relationship between sexuality and education. Policy decisions should be based on facts, not on cooked-up surveys and weak opinions.

Crazy curriculum | 12:42 p.m. May 21, 2009

I guarantee as a responsible parent, I can teach my own kids about sex-ed.

For people to claim that schools can teach this subject better than myself and my wife are ridiculous and mis-informed.

And there are no "studies" that show "Utah" sex-ed programs are failing. Those studies show that all sex-ed programs are failing.

And finally, teaching or giving a child "protection" is not education it's endorsement.

Mark Lane | 12:46 p.m. May 21, 2009

Here is a simple solution that will satisfy all parties and not cost anything extra. Schools just need to offer two courses: SexEd-A, and SexEd-B. The A class will teach the current material, the B class will be everything in A plus prevention methods. Just require parental permission to attend the B class. The parents would know the material that will be taught in each class (and give their consent) and the student would know. Why does everyone keep debating this year after year?

missing the big picture | 12:47 p.m. May 21, 2009

This debate is missing the big picture; while some want abstenence while others want birth control taught. This is a social issue that is a personal decision and schools should not be the ones teaching it. The parent who reported earlier that she can't do the job of teaching sex education by herself is looking for someone else to pick up for her and teach sexual values to her children. This is a topic that should be discussed by parents and other adults of parents choosing to discuss with teens. Parents need to step up and have the discussion as uncomfortable as it may be.

It REALLY Is Simple | 12:49 p.m. May 21, 2009

A story just posted on the DN stated in part:

"The teen birth rate (in Utah) went from 14.8 per 1,000 teens in 2004 to 18.6 in 2007, a 26 percent increase. The trend is troubling for a number of reasons, Haven said, the main one being that children born to teen mothers are more likely to have poor health, experience learning problems, live in poverty and go on to become teen mothers themselves.

Along with pregnancies, the rate for the sexually transmitted disease chlamydia in teens went up 20 percent between 2004 and 2006 and another 13 percent between 2006 and 2007, the latest year of complete demographic data."

The bottom line is that teen birth rates and sexually transmitted diseases in our youth in Utah are rising - dramatically!

Anyone, including Church or political leaders, who advocate for abstinence only education should be removed from their positions. I don't care who voted for them or who called them. Youth do need to learn about morals and the value of waiting. But if they don't they need to know how to protect themselves, their partner, and a child not yet ready to be here. PERIOD.

KurtE | 1:27 p.m. May 21, 2009

Let's face it, abstinence education is primarily about enforcing what can be defined as "traditional" or religious values. It is not about science or addressing the actual needs of the students. If one looks at other systems, one finds that advanced industrial countries with mandatory very explicit and "sex positive" education policies (such as Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, etc.) have much lower rates of STDs, teen pregnancies, abortions, and single mothers than does the United States which has almost third world levels of STDs. All individuals whether religious or not and whether conservative or not should be provided with all the necessary information to have a safe and fulfilling sex life. What they do with that information (wait until marriage, wait until a certain age, etc.) should be a personal decision based upon their individual values. Nothing prevents churches and parents from providing a sexual philosophy by which they believe is preferable to live.

tired | 1:53 p.m. May 21, 2009

of hearing people speak of "student's needs" as if sexual activity in teens is a need. They have a pretty comprehensive sex ed program in Britain (at least they claim to) and are currently suffering from an explosion of teen and unwed pregnancies. The Inconvenient truth nobody wants to adress here is that kids will push the envelope...it is their nature...the farther we move the boundary, the farther they will exceed it to rebel and assert their independence.

Tre | 2:15 p.m. May 21, 2009

What is taught in school is not meant to be used just during the K-12 time period. When a student leaves high school, he/she does not instantly stop reading, computing, etc. School is a time to learn information that will assist the students in becoming lifelong learners and positive, contributing members of our world. Knowledge of the sexual process, anatomy, abstinence, and contraceptives is not meant for a specific time period, but for a lifetime. It is a rare married couple that does not use contraception. Why are so many afraid of knowledge?

Scratching My Head | 2:19 p.m. May 21, 2009

To Crazy Curriculum who says, in part: "teaching or giving a child "protection" is not education it's endorsement." Teaching about protection is far from endorsement if teaching abstinence. Fact is, a number of teens will engage in sexual activity regardless of being taught abstinence. I would rather teach my daughter (or son) to abstain, but if she ever gets in a situation where she's not going to abstain to use protection, as opposed to simply teaching abstain, and then have her engage in sexual activity, get pregnant and ruin her life (and perhaps the life of her unplanned child) at age 15, 16, 17, 18. I suspect we all know at least one family (regardless of whether you will admit it or not) which teaches abstinence only, refuses to discuss protection, and yet one or more of the kids engages in unprotected sex. I hope for the childrens' sake an unwanted pregnancy isn't the end result.

what is comprehensive sex ed | 3:48 p.m. May 21, 2009

Don't you think it is strange that the federal funding for comprehensive sex ed if 4 times that of abstinence programs and yet abstinence programs get blamed for rate increases. Comprehensive sex ed proponents don't want to tell the real agenda behind their curriculum. It is a valueless based program that teaches anything is ok as long as you do it safely. It teaches other sexual practices you can experience without exposing yourself to pregnancy and STDs - something most parents don't want in the public classroom. although classroom unit provides a basic foundation (although they only have a few days for this kind of material) let's focus on helping kids and parents communicate - that is where the difference is made. Let's shout out that premarital abstinence is expected! Nine of out 10 kids say that talking to a parent would help them make that decision.

HB 189 | 4:21 p.m. May 21, 2009

before coming to conclusions it's best to research the bill yourself, the issue is plain and simple, teens need to know how to protect them selves in ways other than abstinance, one because parents give wrong information, and two, pregnancy rates and STD rate have steadily risen in Utah since 2002, teens deserve the right to be safe.

Honesty | 4:40 p.m. May 21, 2009

Abstinence education does WORK!

When it is reenforces by values being taught at home and church, etc, (outside the school)

but when they are getting conflicting messages at home, etc, and NOT good reasons, nor any expectation of being abstinent,

then of course it doesn't work well,

condoms do NOT prevent teen-sex either, just the results of it,

and just makes teen-sex more okay,

The question we need to ask is:

are we trying to prevent teen-sex, or teen-pregnancy and stds?

What are treaching them, what core values and expections are we teaching them?

And don't kid yourselves that we can't come up with agreed upon core values and expections for our children.

STEVE | 4:58 p.m. May 21, 2009

If parents want their kids to practice abstinence it should be taught that way in the home.
If kids are taught about condoms and other protective measures as well as STD's that isn't going to make them change their minds and start having sex!! However, it WILL benefit those kids who are going to experiment with sex.

school teacher | 5:24 p.m. May 21, 2009

The kids do seem to take to heart all the other stuff we teach them here so why not the sex ed? All the little ones are home every day doing their homework before playing, studying, not until their time is up but always until they have a clear understanding of the subject at hand. Since they are such good little learners, it will surely help the problem if we teach about it in school. Grow up folks. This is not an education problem it is societal. No matter what we say at school we get trumped by (in order of appearance) friends, television, politicians, almost anyone else, and parents. The push to take it to schools if for two purposes. To legitimize the idea that abstinence is impossible and to have a scapegoat when it does not work!

Anonymous | 5:35 p.m. May 21, 2009

"It comes back to parenting. It should be taught in the home," he said. "We don't want people teaching things to our kids that we don't approve of."

Honestly, if you truly believe that, then there should be NO SEX ED taught in schools. You cannot have it both ways, you can't claim its the parents responisbility to educate their children on what they want them to know and then expect the schools to have sex ed.

RE: Re: It's not working... | 5:45 p.m. May 21, 2009

Okay, I'm pretty sure the West High School student doesn't have 50 friends from Clearfield. It may be unscientific, but the results are still results and shows the sexual activity that occurs under abstinence based sex-ed.

ignorance doesn't teach values | 5:50 p.m. May 21, 2009

The education of contraception isn't all of the sudden going to sway some teens' opinions from abstinance to that of having sex. If they were originally intending to have sex, they would do it anyways, regardless of having education or not.

If ignorance is the way that people think will help solve sex issues teens face, then heck, why not ban drug-awareness programs for that matter that inform teens of what they may be getting themselves into with drugs? Or why not ban sex-ed alltogether? Parents obviously don't want their kids having pre-marital sex, so why not ban it and let the teens live in ignorance? But doing that is absolutely absurd, so why isn't it the same with contraception awareness education? Kids are educated about violence and drugs, etc. because it is stuff they are faced with in everyday situations. If sex is something they are faced with, then why not educate about contraception?

If Rep. Ray truly says it "comes back to the parent", then why doesn't he advocate to ATLEAST let the parents choose to opt-in a kid to a contraception-taught-class, or either to opt out?

How it was for me... | 5:50 p.m. June 4, 2009

Sex education class was treated as a joke and therefore we students took it as a joke. Public schools thought that by making students babysit eggs that that would stop us from having sex. Students simply saw that has a dumb joke, eggs are eggs, babies are babies and no matter how much you dress up an egg to look like a baby it isnt a baby. Private school snarled and hissed at the idea and reluctantly gave in and to this day I applauded the instructor of that class. She had a challenge to bring us information while still trying to work around the religious boundaries of topics. The only education I received in school talked very little about STDS and little about the proper way to put on a condom. In fact, the condoms that were passed out were stapled to a piece of paper.
Parents don't always have all the information, and thats all these students are asking for. Complete information without the taboo or the 'we aren't taking this seriously' overtones. Maybe an after school class for both parents and students would be a nice option?

Do the math... | 7:35 p.m. June 4, 2009

"The teen birth rate (in Utah) went from 14.8 per 1,000 teens in 2004 to 18.6 in 2007, a 26 percent increase."

I realize that 18.6 is "26%" bigger than 14.8, but shouldn't we take note that this number is "per 1,000 teens"?

3.8 out of 1000 is only a 0.38% increase in the per capita rate. That is probably within the statistical margin of error for the survey. At a minimum, it is less "alarming" than the overstated "26 percent."

Do what works best | 7:46 p.m. June 4, 2009

The ultimate value should be to keep kids safe.

Neither religion nor the will of the ACLU should get in the way of this.

What ever form of education, from no sex education, teaching abstence only, teaching use of protection only, or teaching a comprehensive approach is proven to work best, this is what we and everyone else should adopt.

Why should there be a debate about this. Look at the data and do what is best.

@ do the math | 8:25 p.m. June 4, 2009

3.8 more pregnancies is NOT an increase of .38% - it is an increase of 26%. It is an ADDITIONAL .38% of teens - which isn't that much unless it is your teen.

re @ do the math | 8:25 p.m. | 5:39 a.m. June 5, 2009

You might not get it do you? I am not on one side or the other, I am on the side of doing what works best. I repeat do what works best, what ever that is.

Anonymous | 3:00 p.m. June 5, 2009

Oh come on...do you really think students need to be taught how to put on a condom? I agree that the real push for this is so that schools can provide birth control without parental consent.

We don't let students determine what is taught in math, science or history. Why are we so concerned with their opinions here? They're teenagers for heavens sake...let parents decide what is best for their own children.

Jake | 6:04 p.m. June 9, 2009

I can understand why the thought of kids rolling condoms down a banana makes parents nervous, but I see no harm in teaching about contraceptives in school. At school, kids can relate to each other (and giggle sheepishly) as they learn and ask questions. The state has an appropriate interest in this subject, but abstinence as mere pregnancy and disease prevention provides a poor platform for understanding sex. Teens are drenched in hormones, flooded with emotions, and caught under tremendous social pressure, and parents have the formidable task of helping them to make sense of it all. They should teach their kids (before sex-ed) that sex is an extension of more familiar forms of affection (hugging, kissing) that is reserved for husband and wife, that it strengthens the love that binds them together - and that it's FANTASTIC!!! Teach them that sex outside of marriage is different - a counterfeit, trading on real physical and emotional excitement while leading to heartache, damaged self-esteem, and regret. Where parents fall short, schools can at least teach kids about safe sex. And besides, it might be good to dispel the mystique that a homely piece of latex gains from our secrecy.

Amanda | 7:00 p.m. June 17, 2009

Public education should give students information that will help them with their daily lives. Not every student that goes through the Utah public education system will go to college, and become a doctor, a lawyer, or a scientist. However, nearly every student will eventually be kicked out of their parents home, and be forced to learn about real life. This is where my education from a Utah public school failed me.
Utah should make sure that its students know about finances and sexual education. Nearly all of Utahs students will as some point in their lives be engaged in sexual relations. Some students will wait until marriage to have these relations, and others will not. But either way parents are not teaching their children enough about this awkward subject. This issue isnt about encouraging our teens to be sexually active or encouraging them to practice abstinence. This issue is about giving them information that they will at some point need.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.