Tweet
So this was written by a friend. The faculty advisor pulled it from a BYU review because it was too "edgy" and that comparing the Netherlands and Utah was inappropriate as a comparison.
Though others may find fault the author and I don't blame the advisor.
I blame the lousy institution known as BYU. It is a farcical never neverland of academia where reality is routinely ignored, truth is brushed under the rug and fear amongst faculty remains at "red" levels.
(the person who wrote this holds no ill will for the advisor...my editorial is my own...i think all understand of the predicament of the professor: publish a controversial article and risk one's job or do the right thing with no real benefit other than moral satisfaction...again, this is the fault of the institution, not the professor.
BYU is hands down the most ridiculous "academic" institution this side of Bob Jones University. There is nothing controversial here that grown adults can't discuss rationally
Article Follows:
Education: Curbing Utah’s Rising Teen Pregnancy Rate
Last year a pregnant 17-year-old girl paid a man $150 to beat her, hoping it would induce a late term miscarriage. In response, the Utah State Legislature responded passed a bill with a frightening loophole that could criminalize a woman for an accidental miscarriage, regardless of intent. This bill is far from necessary and avoids the root of the problem altogether: Utah teens aren’t being educated about sex.
Utah lawmakers are confident in the idealism of an abstinence only sex-ed program, but they are ignoring important statistics: Utah teen pregnancies have doubled since 2002. While the statistic is slightly skewed by the number of young marriages, the numbers of pregnancies of unmarried teenagers remains high. Utah legislators need to consider which is worse: teenagers having sex, or teenagers having babies.
Current state law requires the use of an abstinence program, encouraging marital sexual activity as the preventative measure against unwanted pregnancies, the curriculum of choice for a conservative state reluctant to talk about sex in schools. Where Utah’s sex-ed is problematic is how it constrains teachers from discussing anything but abstinence. Teachers are not allowed to engage in discussion regarding sex outside of marriage or the use of contraceptives. High school students taking Anatomy and Physiology must have parental consent in order to be present during the reproductive unit. Even discussing the use of contraceptives is prohibited. Their hope is that parents will make up the difference. A home based sex-ed, is desirable to Utah legislators, but parental involvement isn’t universal. Some kids aren’t being educated at all.
Despite the alarming rise in teen pregnancy, Utah lawmakers continue to oppose alternate sex-ed programs. For example, the state legislature recently refused even to debate a bill allowing teachers to discuss the benefits and drawbacks of preventative measures against pregnancy and diseases. This unabashed opposition to alternative sex-ed programs stems from a gross misconception that current abstinence only education is preventing unmarried teenage pregnancies and abortions. But when that teenage girl from Vernal decided to have a man beat her to induce an abortion, the Utah legislature failed to respond to the obvious problem: despite an education program structured to limit teenage sex, teenage girls in Utah are still getting pregnant. Utah lawmakers need to jettison ideological dogma and look to sex-ed programs that will reduce teenage pregnancies.
The Netherlands, for example, has adopted a statistically favorable approach to sex education. Children learn about sex at the age of five in schools, but most children are also actively taught in the home with their parents. They learn both the anatomy and the importance of love and consent in a sexual relationship, and by ten they understand how to use different forms of contraceptives to prevent disease and pregnancy. The Dutch’s failure to not shy away from sex as a topic may be controversial to conservatives wishing the topic remain an exclusive parent-child discussion, but the proof lies in what is the lowest teenage birthrate in the West. Utah’s teen pregnancy rate is over 5 times that of that Netherlands, 53 pregnant per 1000 girls as compared to 11.8 per 1000. Schools and parents share the uncomfortable but vital burden of sex-ed, compared to Utah where it’s brushed under the rug. Such an early education with a wide scope comparing and contrasting various preventative methods might scare Utah lawmakers and lobbyists, but it’s provided Dutch teenagers with the educational resources to discourage reckless sexual behavior, resources that began early enough to encourage safe and appropriate sexual practices. This open and honest approach to sex results in very few Dutch teenagers getting pregnant.
Today children are discovering sex at an earlier age, but, unlike the Dutch, they don’t have the broad education necessary to protect them against the consequences accompanying sex. Involved parents will teach their children, but the growing pregnancy rate shows some Utah teens are having sex whether their parents (and Bishops) like it or not.
Utah must improve the discussion and, at the very least, allow teachers to talk about contraceptives. It will ensure that Utah’s teens are well educated if and when they decide to have premarital sex. If not, more teenage girls will opt for the Vernal route, taking yet more drastic and abhorrent measures to eliminate pregnancies that could have been prevented.
Though others may find fault the author and I don't blame the advisor.
I blame the lousy institution known as BYU. It is a farcical never neverland of academia where reality is routinely ignored, truth is brushed under the rug and fear amongst faculty remains at "red" levels.
(the person who wrote this holds no ill will for the advisor...my editorial is my own...i think all understand of the predicament of the professor: publish a controversial article and risk one's job or do the right thing with no real benefit other than moral satisfaction...again, this is the fault of the institution, not the professor.
BYU is hands down the most ridiculous "academic" institution this side of Bob Jones University. There is nothing controversial here that grown adults can't discuss rationally
Article Follows:
Education: Curbing Utah’s Rising Teen Pregnancy Rate
Last year a pregnant 17-year-old girl paid a man $150 to beat her, hoping it would induce a late term miscarriage. In response, the Utah State Legislature responded passed a bill with a frightening loophole that could criminalize a woman for an accidental miscarriage, regardless of intent. This bill is far from necessary and avoids the root of the problem altogether: Utah teens aren’t being educated about sex.
Utah lawmakers are confident in the idealism of an abstinence only sex-ed program, but they are ignoring important statistics: Utah teen pregnancies have doubled since 2002. While the statistic is slightly skewed by the number of young marriages, the numbers of pregnancies of unmarried teenagers remains high. Utah legislators need to consider which is worse: teenagers having sex, or teenagers having babies.
Current state law requires the use of an abstinence program, encouraging marital sexual activity as the preventative measure against unwanted pregnancies, the curriculum of choice for a conservative state reluctant to talk about sex in schools. Where Utah’s sex-ed is problematic is how it constrains teachers from discussing anything but abstinence. Teachers are not allowed to engage in discussion regarding sex outside of marriage or the use of contraceptives. High school students taking Anatomy and Physiology must have parental consent in order to be present during the reproductive unit. Even discussing the use of contraceptives is prohibited. Their hope is that parents will make up the difference. A home based sex-ed, is desirable to Utah legislators, but parental involvement isn’t universal. Some kids aren’t being educated at all.
Despite the alarming rise in teen pregnancy, Utah lawmakers continue to oppose alternate sex-ed programs. For example, the state legislature recently refused even to debate a bill allowing teachers to discuss the benefits and drawbacks of preventative measures against pregnancy and diseases. This unabashed opposition to alternative sex-ed programs stems from a gross misconception that current abstinence only education is preventing unmarried teenage pregnancies and abortions. But when that teenage girl from Vernal decided to have a man beat her to induce an abortion, the Utah legislature failed to respond to the obvious problem: despite an education program structured to limit teenage sex, teenage girls in Utah are still getting pregnant. Utah lawmakers need to jettison ideological dogma and look to sex-ed programs that will reduce teenage pregnancies.
The Netherlands, for example, has adopted a statistically favorable approach to sex education. Children learn about sex at the age of five in schools, but most children are also actively taught in the home with their parents. They learn both the anatomy and the importance of love and consent in a sexual relationship, and by ten they understand how to use different forms of contraceptives to prevent disease and pregnancy. The Dutch’s failure to not shy away from sex as a topic may be controversial to conservatives wishing the topic remain an exclusive parent-child discussion, but the proof lies in what is the lowest teenage birthrate in the West. Utah’s teen pregnancy rate is over 5 times that of that Netherlands, 53 pregnant per 1000 girls as compared to 11.8 per 1000. Schools and parents share the uncomfortable but vital burden of sex-ed, compared to Utah where it’s brushed under the rug. Such an early education with a wide scope comparing and contrasting various preventative methods might scare Utah lawmakers and lobbyists, but it’s provided Dutch teenagers with the educational resources to discourage reckless sexual behavior, resources that began early enough to encourage safe and appropriate sexual practices. This open and honest approach to sex results in very few Dutch teenagers getting pregnant.
Today children are discovering sex at an earlier age, but, unlike the Dutch, they don’t have the broad education necessary to protect them against the consequences accompanying sex. Involved parents will teach their children, but the growing pregnancy rate shows some Utah teens are having sex whether their parents (and Bishops) like it or not.
Utah must improve the discussion and, at the very least, allow teachers to talk about contraceptives. It will ensure that Utah’s teens are well educated if and when they decide to have premarital sex. If not, more teenage girls will opt for the Vernal route, taking yet more drastic and abhorrent measures to eliminate pregnancies that could have been prevented.
Comment