Saturday, September 5, 2009

Sex Education, Society and Parental Responsibility

Many conservatives picket against sex education in our public schools, as thy think that this ia a parental responsibility. I agree. Children should be taught at home what is appropriate behavior. But, this is not always done. What then?

Statistics show that sexual experimentation is happening at an increasingly younger age. And the experiementation is not just an "innocent kiss". STDs can be the "sorry" result. This is disturbing and should concern all of us. Where are the parents?

I, by no means, think that public education "should" be where children learn about sex, but sometimes it is the only place that some can become informed. Where are the parents?

Many involved parents are concerned over the information given in these classes. And I believe that it is the parent's right to protect their children from information that they deem unnecessary, damaging or against their convictions.

So, why are children becoming more curious at an earlier age? Is it becuase Hollywood presents sex in a certain "light"? Is it because parents are not present or "engaged" to know what their children are watching or doing? Is it both?

Our society needs to protect itself and its children. If parents do not do their duty, then it is necessary for some other organizational structure to do the work. The Church and the school are the avenues where sex education has happened outside of the home.

The Church our family went to in Maryland had a "class" for all parents and pre-teens presenting a Christian version of "sex education". I thought it was appropriate and breached what sometimes is an embarassing topic for some parents. It gave us material to work on and was a natrual place and format for the "sex talk" to happen.

But, what happens to those children whose parents are not in Church? Should we allow children to be untaught about their sexuality? And then, what should be taught? That is the real question that divides us.

Humans have sexual drives that are quite normal and should be treated so. Children should be informed to their body's functions and should be guided in how to direct these desires in the appropriate ways. But, at the same time, we cannot hide our heads in the sand and believe that all will follow through with these instructions, even when they desire to. Training children to delay gratification is a long process which builds character and our society is not the breeding ground for such development. We are a "fast food" society.

So, what of protecting the children from STDs? Or should we? Should STDs and teen pregnancy be the costs of an undisciplined life? What are the costs to society if this be the stance? I see both sides to the problem and am not sure what the solution is.

But, what I do know is that parents cannot remain uninformed about what their children are doing and what they are exposed to.

No comments: