I am amazed at how much children know about sexual behavior these days. I remember taking a two-hour sex education class at school when I was junior high school. That was my formal introduction to sexuality. I didn't understand it. Yet today, even in elementary school, children know the facts of life. Why are our children so well informed (and often misinformed)?

We don't have to look beyond our homes for the answer to that question. Nearly every aspect of sexuality is portrayed on television at all hours of the day and night. From filthy talk shows in the daytime hours to pointless nighttime dramas in the evening hours, sexual behavior is explicitly discussed and demonstrated. A program does not have to show sexual intercourse to be pornographic. Music groups like the Spice Girls sell sex in their appearance and the messages of their songs. If these performers were not sensually dressed, their music might still be as popular, but I doubt it would receive the same amount of attention it does if they were very conservative in their lyrics, dress, and actions. Even the evening news, especially the public discussions of our public leaders' indiscretions, conveys messages of a sexual nature.

Beyond the media's irresponsible approach to sexuality that portrays adolescent sexual behavior as a normal event without consequences, I am most disturbed by the liberal sociologists and psychologists who portray our teenagers as mindless automatons who are entirely at the mercy of their primitive drives. These researchers and activists believe the only way to stem the tide of premarital pregnancies and the spread of disease is to teach "safe sex" and to distribute condoms and other contraceptives. I give our youth more credit than that. Many youth today do engage in various degrees of sexual contact and I am not opposed to teaching safe sex in high-risk groups. However, many young people have chosen to abstain from sex until marriage. Teaching a message that abstinence is acceptable and providing young people with ways to maintain their sexual purity until marriage is a very effective form of contraception and strategy for the prevention of disease. You can't get pregnant or a sexually transmitted disease if you are not sexually active.

So what should we do? I am not disturbed by sex-education in the school. It is my job as a parent to teach my children the biology of their sexuality as well as our religious view of it. I really am not opposed to schools distributing condoms. If I have done my job, my children will be less likely to engage in inappropriate behaviors than any seminar at school can provide. Of course they always have free will to do what they want, but I can't believe that a day-long program on "safe sex" can completely counteract a lifetime of teaching in my home.

I suggest that parents monitor the programs, movies, and music their children consume. Even if a parent chooses to allow his or her children to engage in programs with sexual contact, talking about the programs and ramifications of those behaviors can teach these young people an approach to sexuality that is consistent with the family's social and religious views.

As with most things I discuss in this column, the responsible approach to teaching sexuality to our children involves parents who are active, thinking and planning people. They don't leave to chance something so important as learning sexual behavior. They pro-actively engage in processes at home that consistently communicate a healthy approach to sexuality.

Back to the Top of the PageBack to the HealthWise Home Page