Sexuality Education in Public Schools
Young people in the United States—particularly young women—need education and information to prevent unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases and infections (STDs/STIs). Each year, 750,000 adolescent females in the U.S. become pregnant,1 and teen pregnancy rates are far higher in the U.S. than in most other developed countries.2
Healthy People 2010 seeks to increase the number of young adults receiving school-based education on contraception and abstinence.3 The U.S. Surgeon General issued a report in 2001 emphasizing the important role of comprehensive school-based programs in promoting responsible sexual behavior and lessening some of the serious problems of sexual health experienced by the nation.4 In addition, numerous studies have found certain comprehensive sex education programs to be highly effective in delaying initiation of sex, reducing number of sexual partners, reducing incidence of unprotected sex and increasing condom usage among American youth, in addition to other positive results.5 The Report Card examines whether states are promoting sexuality education by requiring school-based sexuality education and enacting content requirements for these programs that include information about contraception.6
States have already begun receiving funds to implement new "Personal Responsibility Education Programs" which must include information on contraception, abstinence, healthy relationships, and other adult preparation topics. The programs must be evidence-based, medically accurate, and age-appropriate. If states do not apply for program funding, local entities will be able to access the funds by the third year of the grant. The Affordable Care Act also restores funding for Title V abstinence-only programs through 2014.
Does the state require that sexuality education be taught and that it include information about contraception?
States receive a "meets policy" if they require sexuality education to be taught and if their content requirements include coverage of contraception. States receive a "no policy" if they either do not require sexuality education or if their content requirements do not include contraception.
| State | Strength of Policy | Change from 2007 |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | No Policy | Same |
| Alaska | No Policy | Same |
| Arizona | No Policy | Same |
| Arkansas | No Policy | Same |
| California | No Policy | Same |
| Colorado | No Policy | Same |
| Connecticut | No Policy | Same |
| Delaware | Meets Policy | Same |
| District of Columbia | Meets Policy | Same |
| Florida | No Policy | Same |
| Georgia | No Policy | Same |
| Hawaii | Meets Policy | Same |
| Idaho | No Policy | Same |
| Illinois | No Policy | Same |
| Indiana | No Policy | Same |
| Iowa | No Policy | Same |
| Kansas | No Policy | Same |
| Kentucky | No Policy | Same |
| Louisiana | No Policy | Same |
| Maine | Meets Policy | Same |
| Maryland | Meets Policy | Same |
| Massachusetts | No Policy | Same |
| Michigan | No Policy | Same |
| Minnesota | No Policy | Same |
| Mississippi | No Policy | Same |
| Missouri | No Policy | Same |
| Montana | No Policy | Same |
| Nebraska | No Policy | Same |
| Nevada | No Policy | Same |
| New Hampshire | No Policy | Same |
| New Jersey | No Policy | Same |
| New Mexico | Meets Policy | Better |
| New York | No Policy | Same |
| North Carolina | Meets Policy | Better |
| North Dakota | No Policy | Same |
| Ohio | No Policy | Same |
| Oklahoma | No Policy | Same |
| Oregon | Meets Policy | Better |
| Pennsylvania | No Policy | Same |
| Rhode Island | Meets Policy | Same |
| South Carolina | Meets Policy | Same |
| South Dakota | No Policy | Same |
| Tennessee | No Policy | Same |
| Texas | No Policy | Same |
| Utah | No Policy | Same |
| Vermont | Meets Policy | Same |
| Virginia | No Policy | Same |
| Washington | No Policy | Same |
| West Virginia | Meets Policy | Better |
| Wisconsin | No Policy | Same |
| Wyoming | No Policy | Same |
Data Source: Guttmacher Institute, "State Policies in Brief: Sex and STD/HIV Education," September 2010, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SE.pdf, September 10, 2010.
Footnotes
1 The Guttmacher Institute, “Facts on American Teens Sexual and Reproductive Health,” January 2010, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_ATSRH.html#n25, accessed September 24, 2010.
2 Jacqueline E. Darroch et al., The Guttmacher Institute, “Teenage Sexual and Reproductive Behavior in Developed Countries: Can More Progress Be Made?” 2001, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/eurosynth_rpt.pdf, accessed September 24, 2010.
3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy People 2010, 2nd ed. (Washington: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000), Objective 9-11, available at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople, accessed September 24, 2010.
4 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, The Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Promote Sexual Health and Responsible Sexual Behavior (Washington: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General, June 2001).
5 Sue Alford, Advocates for Youth, “Science and Success: Programs that Work to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, HIV, and Sexually Transmitted Infection,” 2007, available at http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&..., accessed September 24, 2010.
6 Abstinence-until-marriage curricula are not included; as such curricula have been demonstrated to be ineffective with adolescents. Debra W. Haffner, “What's Wrong with Abstinence-Only Sexuality Education Programs?” Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) Report 25 (April/May 1997), 9-13, available at http://www.siecus.org/siecusreport/volume25/25-4.pdf, accessed September 24, 2010.
