Published March 28, 2008
One out of every 4 teen girls has a sexually transmitted disease, according to a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
That's right, 25 percent of the teenage female population has an STD. Out of a group of four friends, one has an STD. The odds are that in a graduating class of 400 girls, 100 students will have an STD. Unfortunately, 80 percent of those infected have no idea.
It's estimated 3.2 million adolescent females have at least one of the most common STDs — human papillomavirus (HPV), chlamydia, herpes simplex virus and trichomoniasis.
Fifty percent of teenage girls will become pregnant within the first six months of becoming sexually active.
Though consistent and correct usage of the male latex condom can reduce the risk of STD infection, there is no protective method that will 100 percent prevent the transmission of any STD.
These are the facts, but how do we use them to implement change? Typically, when it comes to sex "education" there are two opposing teams. Team A: the abstinence-only sex ed and Team B: the physical health-based sex ed.
Abstinence-only education, or teaching people to postpone sexual activity until they are in a long-term, mutually monogamous relationship, is usually what is taught to middle and high school science students.
Physical health-based sex education forgoes guilt trips and provides people with sexual health information if they choose to participate in sexual activity.
I propose both types of education should be taught to the public, specifically young adults and teenagers.
According to statistics, 50 percent of teenagers are sexually active. That means two major things: One, despite what we see on television and hear on the radio, not everyone is having sex. Two, half of the teenage population is engaging in sexual activities, so abstinence-only education is possibly working only half of the time.
In the 10th grade, I took sex ed with my abundantly educated, deeply passionate biology teacher. She instilled fear into a large group of 15- and 16-year-olds. But, apparently, that fear didn't last too long because before I completed my sophomore year, a number of my classmates were parents; by the time we graduated, that number grew and before we hit 21, well, you get the picture.
If abstinence-only sex education only works with roughly half of the student population, we are failing our children. If we know, for whatever reason, that teenagers and young adults are going to have sex, we should teach them how best to protect themselves in those situations.
It would be invaluable if the definition of "sexual activity" officially included all sexual acts. If not, we will continue to have large numbers of teenagers and young adults who test positive for STDs and consider themselves virgins. The odds are if you do not think you are engaging in sexual activity, you will not consider taking precautions to protect yourself as much as possible.
Refusing to teach young adults and teens proper sexual health has something to do with 1 in every 4 teenage girls having an STD; but so does not taking the time to tell teenagers that peer pressure, skewed media imagery, violent music and other outside influences is not enough to participate in sexual activity.
Parents, guardians, siblings, mentors and community leaders, it's your responsibility to tell your children they should really consider not engaging in sex until they are old enough and responsible enough to make that decision and until they can fairly evaluate and maintain their sexual, mental, emotional, physical and psychological well-being.
The odds are people will engage in sexual activity if they're educated or not. Let us work together to provide the needed tools so people can make the best possible choices.
Katrina L. Rogers is a member of The Times Community Board. Send comments to shreveportopinion@gannett.com.
