|
Official statistics show a rising
number of girls under 14 becoming pregnant and the Government
is missing its target for cutting the under-18 pregnancy rate by 15 per
cent from its 1998 level.
The conception rates for under-18s have risen by 40 per
cent since 1999 and the teenage pregnancy rate is still one of the
highest in Western Europe.
The human tragedy surrounding this failure is bad enough. Even more
worrying is that experts and officials responsible for the sex education
curriculum and expenditure of millions of pounds should have known that
failure was inevitable.
In the early 90’s I and others were warning that the approach to sex
education was flawed – and the reasons still hold today.
Firstly, there is no evidence that sex education works. In 1991 I could
find no references to empirical studies on sex education. Even when I
broadened my study to include any research on any of the so-called
“educations” (drugs education, for example), there was no evidence of
success. The limited evidence showed no change and indeed a worsening!
Pregnancies went up not down after sex education.
Can you imagine any other enterprise where the policy for millions of
people and expenditure of millions of pounds is based on no evidence?
Secondly, it is well understood in educational and especially
psychological circles that transmission of information and techniques is
never enough in solving human problems. Most of the sex education
programmes I studied consisted mostly of transmission of information. At
best, most youngsters saw this approach as a joke, many of whom knew
more about sex than their teachers. At worst, it gives false confidence.
If you explain the biology of reproduction and how to prevent pregnancy
and sexually transmitted diseases with contraception, all this does is
give false confidence and encourage the act. Thank goodness I didn’t
have sex education at school! There is a place for natural and healthy
fear.
Thirdly, how in 2006, can any educator or politician think that we can
change behaviour by telling people to behave? This is the favoured
approach in “faith schools”. Youngsters are told that sex at a young age
is wrong that if they indulge in it they are bad people and God will
punish them. Being told how to behave annoys people and they rebel by
doing the opposite. Of course, if they don’t believe in God the threat
is useless. However, according to a spokesman for the Department for
Education and Skills it looks as if more telling is on the way. Beverley
Hughes will be emphasising the message that young people should delay
having sex.
Even alerting people to danger usually never works because the
implications are so remote. For example, surely the health of one’s baby
in the womb would be the highest priority of most pregnant women? Yet,
why do many pregnant women smoke when experts warn them: “smoking harms
your unborn baby”?
What’s the solution?
We need to think and act in terms of values education not
sex education. Values education is not about content – a set of values
or about indoctrinating. Values education is a process of open and deep
discussion during which youngsters come to their own realisation of what
“good” and “bad” for them. Many educators don’t believe that youngsters
can arrive at answers that are good for them. My experience is that with
enough time and honest discussion they are. Space in this article does
not permit a detailed discussion of how values education takes place,
but here is a brief summary.
A values education facilitator is skilled at Socratic questioning -
helping others to see for themselves the implications of their behaviour
- assessing values for long-term well-being of self and others.
Facilitators must encourage people to give reasons for their views (this
is the secret – having to justify).
In a values education session the facilitators' views
carry no more authority than the participants’ do. This means that
facilitators do not dictate what is right or wrong – but only what is
right or wrong for them personally - with reasons. Anyone in the group
is entitled to state why he or she would not respond in such-and-such a
way, and other members of the group are entitled to respectfully test
the reasoning of fellow-participants.
A consensus may emerge, but facilitators should ensure
that this is not forced and the consensus view should not be forced,
explicitly or implicitly, on any person. Naturally, many questions will
arise from my outline description of a values education approach to sex
education. However, there is encouraging evidence that a values
education approach works.
In the San Marcos school district in the USA a values education
programme reduced teenage pregnancies over two years from 147 to 20. In
the North Kansa City School system pregnancies at one school dropped
from 48 in 89/90 to 24 the next year.
Summary
Spending another £15 million over three years to deliver
improved access to sexual health services, giving free condoms to
children - possibly as young as 12 - in sports halls, shops and swimming
baths, and making children more knowledgeable about abortion (some of
the government suggestions) are only treating the symptoms. A values
education approach, done properly, will cure much of the cause. All we
need now are government education departments and curriculum bodies to
pay attention to, and think clearly about, what is already known.
Dr Bill would be delighted
to talk at your next conference or event and give more details on how a
values education approach to sex education can improve effectiveness.
Contact
Dr Bill Robb
Copyright
© 2008 Values Education Ltd
Note to
editors. Feel free to use this article as long as the following
details are retained. “A values education article from CAVE
www.valueseducation.co.uk ”
|
