Speaking of Sex

In spite of the solidarity on sex ed among parents who might have trouble finding common ground for their children’s math or music requirements, sex education as it’s currently taught in this state is “all over the map,” according to Brigid Riley.

“It’s one of those intensely locally controlled issues,” she explains; what your child learns in class may depend not only on the school district, but on a particular school, a particular teacher, or a particular parent who happens to have the principal on speed-dial. In 2000, a group of parents in the Osseo school district forced the district to divide its sex ed into dual tracks, with abstinence-only on one side and the comprehensive approach recommended by experts such as Resnick and Riley (not to mention Lutheran Social Services, Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota , and the School Nurse Organization of Minnesota—all partners in a a coalition called Sexuality Education for Life–Minnesota) on the other.

While state law mandates that students learn about HIV and STD transmission, there’s no graduation standard for health in Minnesota and it’s not always clear what gets covered in class. A survey of 140 Minnesota health teachers conducted by the Minnesota Department of Education reported that 94 percent of high school students get some kind of training in healthy relationships. Only half hear any formal discussion about sexual orientation and fewer than a third receive instruction in correct condom use.

While Riley says that many school districts are doing a great job of navigating such delicate terrain in an age-appropriate way, some educators may retreat from such topics entirely, for fear of offending the sensibilities of a few vocal parents and others in their districts. Last year, pressure from the Minnesota Family Council, which claimed that sex ed causes “acceptance of alternative sexual lifestyles and behaviors such as anal sex and anal-oral sex,” led to what council education specialist Barb Anderson described to the Minnesota Christian Chronicle as an “overwhelming grassroots response from Minnesota citizens who called their legislators and the governor and told them they did not want sex education mandated in their school.” She went on to describe the proposed comprehensive sex ed mandate as “graphic, unhealthy, [and] pro-homosexual.”

Of course, not talking about sex with teens is no guarantee they won’t test the boundaries anyway. An eight-year, federally funded longitudinal study of 20,000 young people, published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in 2005, found that teens who took “virginity pledges” of the sort favored in abstinence-only training were actually more likely to experiment with oral and anal sex than peers who didn’t promise to stay pure.

Such troubling statistics are the reason comprehensive sex ed advocates say it’s more important than ever for parents to talk to their teens early and often about their sexual health. October happens to be “Let’s Talk Month,” when youth health experts encourage parents to bring up the subject. (A helpful hint: Raise the topic when you’re in the car. Seat belts prevent kids from squirming away; facing forward limits the need for eye contact that might otherwise make them clam up.) But talking with your teens is only the beginning.

“The second step is to talk with teachers or your school district about what’s being taught,” Riley says. “You have the right to ask what your children are learning, and you have the right to view curriculum and say, ‘This is great’ or ‘This isn’t.’ ” If parents want to protect their kids with the best information out there, we have to speak more forcefully about what we expect from sex ed, she adds. “The vocal minority has won the day. The nonvocal majority needs to let kids know we’re on their side.”