Unintended Consequences of the Bill

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction. Means of Evaluation/Accountability
Unintended Consequences
Position Identification and Statement
Identification of Two (2) Competing Positions
Norms and Values Reflected in Each Position
Arguments for Each Position
Arguments against Each Position
References

Introduction. Means of Evaluation/Accountability

The State Department of Education is responsible for evaluating and holding each school district accountable for following the Mississippi Code § 37-13-171. They also had to approve each school district’s sex education program in 2012, when the policy was initially created (Staff, 2018). The Mississippi Department of Human Services and the Department of Health created the pilot programs each county had to implement in schools. The policy is also evaluated every five years to ensure it stays culturally proficient, evidence-based, medically accurate, and age-appropriate for middle and high school students.

Unintended Consequences

Unintended consequences of the bill can include pregnancy, STD transmission, and poor self-esteem, to mention a few. Mississippi created the law aimed at decreasing the teen pregnancy rate (CDC, 2022). To some extent, the rate has decreased since 2013, but as of 2020, the rate is still high at 27.9, and Mississippi continues to maintain the lead in teen pregnancy.

Lack of contraceptives and accurate STD education can increase infections. According to the CDC, Mississippi was ranked #2 in Gonorrhea cases in 2019 (Ozua & Artaman, 2022). The bill does not mandate HIV education (Staff, 2023). Contraceptive education is not only for preventing pregnancy but also essential in preventing the transmission of STDs. In 2017, 43 percent of 20-29 year old’s tested positive for HIV (Staff, 2023). The research and numbers indicate a need for the bill to be modified to fit the needs of the community it serves, not the parents.

Position Identification and Statement

The importance of providing quality sex education for children and adolescents is recognized by public organizations, such as the National Association of Social Workers (NASW, 2022). The Oregon Department of Education published the Education Standards for Elementary and Secondary Schools. The standards introduce important definitions to develop an understanding of gender identity, self-expression, the dangers of risky sexual behavior, and raising awareness of healthy relationships.

The 2021 Act on Real Education and Access for Healthy Youth requires the establishment of support for sex education for young people (117th Congress, 2021). NASW supports legal propositions, initiatives, laws, and policies to approve standards for sex education. Social workers know that sex education aims to support the healthy development of young people (NASW, 2022). NASW fully supports the current policy and legislative action but believes that more attention should be paid to this process.

School social workers should be involved in school sex education to enable professional fulfillment. NASW (2022) advises that current standards for sex education may not be sufficient. Developing further legislative standards for evaluating the effectiveness of training programs should be a goal for joint efforts. Sex education in schools should aim to establish a stable, safe, and prosperous society. NASW encourages legislative initiatives to raise awareness of sex education in schools and addresses the need for further development of common standards. Despite recognizing the importance of access to quality education, not all students can count on full-fledged sex education in modern schools. Through joint efforts between the state and public associations, it is possible to achieve a high level of sex education for the future benefit of society.

Identification of Two (2) Competing Positions

Two policies have competing positions to Mississippi Code § 37-13-171. The 117th Congress introduces Oregon’s sex education policy, Oregon Department of Education Chapter 581, and Division 22. Others are Standards for Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, Human Sexuality Education, and the Real Education and Access for Healthy Youth Act of 2021.

Norms and Values Reflected in Each Position

The first position is Oregon’s sex education policy and H.R.3312, which focus on comprehensive instruction and prioritize providing balanced, medically accurate information (117th Congress, 2021). Both curricula emphasize abstinence but do not exclude education on contraceptives and condoms. Oregon’s policy requires information on community resources and how to access them, and both policies require education on HIV/AIDS, STIs, and interpersonal violence (117th Congress, 2021). These policies work to characterize sexuality as a healthy, normal aspect of human development.

Though the Oregon sex education policy encourages abstinence and mutual monogamy, the second position ensures safe and responsible behavior and reduces risks such as exposure to STIs, HIV, and unintended pregnancy. This can empower young people, allowing them to take responsibility for their own choices. These policies reflect self-efficacy and autonomy as they teach young people how to make informed decisions about their health and relationships. H.R.3312 highlights the history of eugenics and forced sterilization in the United States and how vulnerable populations were targeted by the government (117th Congress, 2021). Both policies require using inclusive materials and language, education on different cultures, gender expression and identity, and consent (117th Congress, 2021). They promote a human rights approach, emphasizing that everyone has a right to health, education, and non-discrimination. This enables young people to enhance their understanding of their rights and advocate for the respect of all people.

Arguments for Each Position

H.R.3312 and Oregon’s sex education policy discuss how abstinence-only sex education does not cater to low-income individuals, people of color, and the LGBTQ community. According to Santelli (2017) with Columbia Public Health, abstinence-only sex education does not delay students from engaging in sexual intercourse. The research article explains that adolescents who are not given a comprehensive sex education curriculum are more likely to engage in unsafe sex or contract an STD, violating human rights. Santelli (2017) states that reproductive and adolescent sexual health education should derive from scientific evidence and public health principles and encourage human rights. Oregon’s sex education policy and H.R.3312 benefit students because they teach the fundamentals of safe sex, promote equality, and give young people the knowledge to make independent.

Arguments against Each Position

Focus on Family is a national Christian-based organization that promotes abstinence-only sex education. 180 Degree Sex Education also reports that students not taught the importance of sex before marriage can become less emotionally attached to their partners, affecting their marriage later in life (Education, 2019). Several organizations argue against comprehensive sex education and support abstinence-only sex education policies, such as Mississippi’s. This organization states that comprehensive sex education taught in schools undermines parents, encourages premarital sex, and is not God’s design for sex. People argue that Oregon’s sex education policy and H.R.3312 comprehensive sex education curriculum are ineffective, encourage risky behavior, and violate Christian beliefs.

References

117th Congress. (2021). H.R.3312- Real Education and Access for Healthy Youth Act of 2021. Web.

CDC. (2022). Teen birth rate by state. National Center for Health Statistics. Web.

Education, P. (2019). Why abstinence education works. 180 Degrees. Web.

National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2022). NASW-Virginia. Web.

Ozua, M., & Artaman, A. (2022). A retrospective study of the incidence of bacterial sexually transmitted infection (Chlamydia and Gonorrhea) in the Mississippi delta before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cureus, 14(3), e23712. Web.

Santelli, J. (2017). Abstinence-only education is a failure. Public Health. Web.

Staff, F. (2018). Mississippi Code Title 37. Education § 37-13-171. Abstinence-only or abstinence-plus education. Findlaw. Web.

Staff, G. (2023). Sex and HIV Education. Guttmacher Institute. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!