Page-2 | It’s all about prevention: The purpose of sex education | Style | NewJerseyNewsroom.com -- Your State. Your News.

Page 2 of 2

I hadn't reread these requirements in about five years, and I came away with the feeling that overall, they are pretty wimpy. With the exception of the last two requirements about teaching about same-sex families and sexual orientation, I found the tenor of many of the others pallid and not entirely in the best interests of young people. I didn't feel that the officials who wrote them were really dedicated to the concept of complete prevention.

These standards are rooted in the AIDS Prevention Act of 1999, introduced by former Assemblywoman Marion Crecco of Bloomfield and signed into law by then Acting Governor Donald DiFrancesco in 2002. (Governor Jim Florio had vetoed a similar bill when he was chief executive.) This bill requires that ‘any ‘sex education' and ‘handouts,' ‘speakers, notes' or ‘audiovisuals' concerning prevention of disease of pregnancy clearly state that abstinence from sexual activity is the only completely reliable means of eliminating sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS, and other sexually transmitted diseases and of avoiding pregnancy." The bill also requires instruction about the negatives — but not the positives — of different methods of contraception.

In particular I feel that the standards overly-stress the concept of abstinence. Just how often do young people need to hear that abstinence is the only 100-percent reliable form of prevention from pregnancy and disease? At the end of every lesson? At the end of the unit? Once, twice, 200 times?

I worry that over-emphasis can have the opposite effect of the desired outcome and that young people, particularly in high school, will tune out when their teachers begin to sing the abstinence song one more time. Further, the emphasis on abstinence flies in the face of most current research that shows that after the expenditure of half a billion dollars, federal abstinence-only-until-marriage education programs have failed to help teens have less sex, fewer pregnancies, fewer sexually transmitted diseases, and fewer sexual partners.

Please don't get me wrong. I firmly believe in teaching about abstinence, but I support not teaching it by rote, but in imaginative and creative ways that help kids come to the conclusion themselves that it is by far the safest, smartest method of prevention, certainly through high school.

I think the time has come for the Senate Education Committee to hold a hearing and invite students from different high schools around the state to come to Trenton and testify before its members about their school programs in family life, sex, health, or whatever their programs are called.

If these students say that their programs are really effective in preventing pregnancy, disease, and the need for abortions and the balance between instruction about abstinence and other forms of protection is about right, I will withdraw my suggestion to have the AIDS Prevention Act of 1999 repealed. But if the students tell the committee that there is over-emphasis on abstinence-only, or abstinence-only-until-marriage, instruction and that they only hear about the failure rates of condoms and other forms of contraception, then I hope members will reconsider any good reasons for maintaining the "stress-abstinence law," some seven years since its passage.

In its place, I would like to see the Senate Education Committee recommend, and a brave Senator write and introduce, a more contemporary law-calling it perhaps the "Comprehensive Sex Education Instruction Act of the 21st Century," with the following features: sex education instruction would balance abstinence instruction along with instruction about all other forms of protection and contraception; the positive, protective features of all forms of contraception would be stressed; discussions about prevention of teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and the need to reduce teen abortions would be included; and discussions about prevention of dating and sexual violence among teens would be required.

If New Jersey would have such a law on its books, most public health officials would consider our state a leader in promoting sexual health and prevention among its young people. A law and program like this would be anything but wimpy.

What do you think a Comprehensive Sex Education Act should contain? Are you willing to talk to your state legislators about developing such a statute? Let me know.

Susie Wilson

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Sept. 24, 2009

Susie Wilson, former executive coordinator of the Network for Family Life Education at Rutgers University's Center for Applied and Professional Psychology (now renamed Answer), is a national leader in the fight for effective sexuality and HIV/AIDS education and for prevention of adolescent pregnancy. She can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .