Facts on sex education

Extreme positions aside, many parents- and some teachers too-do have valid reasons for worrying about the possible impact of the new sex education modules being pilot-tested by the Philippine department of education. We can classify these various anxieties into three concerns: preparation, parental privilege and promiscuity.

The concern about preparation is essentially about competence: Are the modules truly age-appropriate; have the teachers been duly trained? The best way to answer this concern is not to claim perfection, but to point out that in fact the modules have already been pilot-tested for three years, under a less controversial name. And that the modules have been prepared and modified in consultation with experts.

The concern about parental privilege revolves around a matter of definition: Who has the primary responsibility for forming a young person's moral character, including that person's attitude to sexuality? The only answer to this question is the young person's family, which we can understand as the first school or, in theological terms, the domestic church. The sex education modules do not undermine this primary responsibility of the family; indeed, they can be an encouragement.

The concern about possible promiscuity is probably the most anxiety-inducing; it is shaped, in part, by the hype over the much-publicised assertions of the extreme position. Even those parents who do not see the DepEd as evil must be wondering: What if, in fact, the sex education modules do promote sexual activity?

A clear answer to that question lies in a UN-sponsored publication entitled "International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education" (available off the Internet). Section 4 of Volume 1, "The evidence base for sexuality education", presents the summary of results of a recent and comprehensive review of the available literature. How comprehensive? "In order to identify as many of the studies as possible throughout the world," the introductory paragraph tells us, "the review team searched multiple computerised databases, examined results from previous searches, contacted 32 researchers in this field, attended professional meetings where relevant studies might be presented, and scanned each issue of 12 journals." How recent? Unesco commissioned the review in 2008-2009.

Altogether, 87 studies of the impact of sexuality education programs integrated into school curriculums were reviewed: 47 from the United States, 11 from other developed countries, 29 from developing countries. Of the six topics, let us look closer at three.

In "initiation of sex," the review showed that none of the programs "hastened initiation." On the other hand, 37 perc ent of the programs "delayed initiation", while 63 per cent "had no significant impact". Our attention might be diverted by the high incidence of sexuality education programs that did not seem to have any discernible impact. But for the concerned parent, the successes cannot be inconsiderable. Well over a third of the programs (including six in developing countries) worked well enough as to delay initiation; none of the programs served to initiate any student into sexual activity.

In "number of sexual partners," the review showed that none of the programs "increased [the] number [of partners]." On the other hand, 44 per cent "decreased [the] number" while 56 per cent "had no significant impact." Again, the majority finding might throw us off, but consider the successes: 44 per cent of all programmes (including five in developing countries) served to lower the number of sexual partners of those students already sexually active; even more important, none of the programs moved any student to add more partners.

In "sexual risk-taking", only one programme (and this one in a developing country) saw "increased risk." On the other hand, a majority of the programmes, or 53 per cent, successfully "reduced risk", while 43 per cent "had no significant impact".

In other words, of the 87 sexuality education programmes under study, most if not all can be said to be anti-promiscuity-that is to say, only one (out of 87 throughout the world) saw an increase in sexual risk-taking, none of them served to increase the number of partners of already sexually active students, none of them served as an excuse for initiation into sexual activity.