Behavior Modification

The debate over teen sex (to outsiders) seems to propose there are only two possible choices:

• Prevent teens from getting birth control
• Provide teens with birth control

If there were ONLY those two choices, then providing birth control would be the wisest choice. However, there are many more than just those two choices to consider.

But for the purpose of this post, I want to point out that the choices have a common theme: both camps want to modify teen behavior. The "protection" advocates want to modify teen behavior to consistently and correctly use condoms+contraception. The sexual self-control advocates (like us) want to modify teen behavior to resist sexual impulses instead of acting on them. For protection advocates, the reducing the physical risks (pregnancy & infection) overall is sufficient. For sexual self-control advocates, there is an additional emphasis on reducing emotional and relational risks as well.

If you look at it dispassionately, which is really hard to do, you can see BOTH sides want to change teen behavior. There's no getting around it, adolescents are controlled by their emotions, have very little ability to accurately predict the future and even less impulse control. Everything adults can do to help teens manage their emotions, connect decisions to outcomes and resist reacting to every stimulus, we should be doing.

Both the protection-advocates and abstinence-advocates stipulate to those adolescent characteristics. There's no disagreement there. Everyone agrees this is how teens are. Its in how do we deal with it that the views diverge.

Protection-advocates assume teens will be impulsive. Their view is: "We can't do anything about it, and there's nothing wrong with teens having sex IF they are responsible." This assumption (teens will have sex no matter what) leads to "how do we minimize the impact of THEIR behavior on the rest of us?"

Abstinence-advocates likewise assume teens will be impulsive. Their view is: "Impulsiveness is a character flaw which adversely affects every aspect of life. Learning impulse control, while difficult, will have positive effects in every aspect of life --- including sexual behavior."

Protection advocates want to educate impulsive teens to use condoms and birth control correctly beginning as young as possible, so they have the training long before they might become sexually active. Abstinence advocates want to educate teens about how powerful their sexual urges will be and train them to choose control that passion... as early as possible, long before they are tempted to be sexually active.

Everyone wants to modify teen behavior. If you have ever known a teen you know for a fact this is difficult. Having a consistent message, like we do for smoking or drugs, across all strata of society would make it easier. If your neighbors were telling their kids about sexual self-control, instead of routinely buying condoms and sticking them in the nightstand, your kid would be more likely to control their urges.

The chance that every single teen will adopt either behavior perfectly is unrealistic. But in hopes of a successful advertising campaign each side has tried to simplify their message to its essence:

• Be safe. Use a condom.
• The safest sex is no sex.

I think we do teens a disservice by making a complex, life-changing decision trivial. I also think we do them a disservice when we imply sex is something to fear --- control yes, fear no.

Beyond all of that, what has been interesting to me, as an observer of both types of sex education, is protection advocates want their own teens to be abstinent, but they want everyone else's teens to use protection.

Smuggling in the truth

Recently, a question was raised about a phrase I used on a previous blog: "I'm looking for ways to smuggle the truth in underground.” Was I referring to subverting the authority of public school administrators? Or perhaps getting specifically prohibited material into the hands of students?

Words have power, I always say... and then I assume everyone knows what I mean. (OK, so I have some blonde moments.)

The truth I want to "smuggle in" to those school districts where I am banned:

1. That condoms/pills/shots do NOT provide the same level of protection as not having sex at all.
   
2. That, despite how hard it is to do, there are benefits to controlling your sexual urges.
3. Teen sex can produce long term relational consequences which adolescents can't grasp, foresee or predict.
   
4. Sometimes people who say they want to keep teens "safe" from sexual consequences are motivated by financial gain.
   

That's it. I'm not trying to keep accurate information about birth control or condoms from teens. I do want them to have access to everything they need to make good decisions. Unfortunately, after talking to tens of thousands of teens, I know for a fact, that they are under the impression "using protection" is just as safe as not having sex. But their idea of "using protection" has a wide range of not very safe actions.

A few common myths teens (and some adults) believe about "safe sex":

• Condoms aren't necessary if you're only having oral sex. Totally false. Most STDs can happily thrive in your mouth and throat.

• You're "safe" if you both get tested before you have sex. The fact is, there are no tests for some STDs. (Not to mention, even if someone says "I go to the clinic every three months so I'm clean," that doesn't mean they didn't get infected last night!)

• Teen pregnancy is the problem which requires the most attention. While it's true, almost a million teen girls become pregnant every year, its been estimated that 9 million 15-24 year olds become infected annually. (And don't forget, pregnancy only lasts a few months, but Herpes is forever.) The estimated direct cost of treating STDs in $14 billion per year --- that doesn't include indirect costs like lost wages and productivity, the cost of treating infants who have been infected, etc.

• If you're on the Pill, you don't have to worry about using condoms. Its a well-documented pattern that older teens and teens with the greatest number of partners are less likely to use condoms than younger less experienced teens. College students are less likely to use condoms than 9th graders, even though the "pool" of potentially infected partners is much higher among college students.
  

• You would be able to tell if you or your partner is infected. After being shown pictures of the "worst-case-scenario" diseased genitals, everyone thinks, "Well, I'd sure notice is someone's penis looked like a pickle." But the universally accepted data is 80% of the time STDs have no symptoms. No symptoms, very mild or hard to identify symptoms, sores in locations you can't see and (for some STDs) no test. [Just fyi, I've had both doctors and clinicians tell me they don't test for Herpes unless there is an active sore to culture. Their reasoning was, "Sure there's blood test to see if someone is a carrier, but you can't DO anything about it if they are, and it takes up too much chair time to deal with the emotional response to 'you have Herpes.']
  

• You can trust the people who give you free birth control and condoms. Are you kidding!? Comprehensive Sex Ed. programs are developed and presented (most of the time) by people who's INCOME is tied to sexual treatment services. Your local sexual health clinics receive federal and state funding to provide pregnancy-related and STD screening services. But (unlike Positively Waiting) they also receive funding from the feds, states and school districts to develop and present their sex ed. program. (Am I the only one who sees this as a conflict of interest?)
  

Even after a 3-to-6 week Comprehensive Sex Ed. program these myths still persist. First, because the medical data is very complicated. Second, because adolescent brains simply aren't capable of taking in data, weighing it against time/nature/experience and being able to predict the outcome of their behavior. But third, because the information gets watered-down to "Be safe. Use a condom."

In a teen mind, the message sound just like: "Be safe, don't smoke." Teens know no one dies immediately from smoking a cigarette, or a joint. You have to do it a lot so the problem builds up over time. Do you know how that message translates to sex? "You shouldn't have sex with a lot of people when you're young." Teens rarely grasp that you can get pregnant or be infected for a lifetime after only one act of sex.

Even after hearing both Positively Waiting and clinical program, some teens still respond, "Thanks for telling me all this stuff. I'm definitely going to slow down." (Yikes!)

How much more will that misconception persist if no one is there acting as their "visual aids"?

Here's the "truth" we're trying to smuggle in a nutshell: See these two people? One practiced "safe sex" by the book and got infected anyway. The other one only worried about being pregnant when she didn't want to be and ended up throwing away the chance to get pregnant when she wanted to.

We just want to be sure teens process the WHOLE TRUTH about how sex can impact their lives. We want them to know they can eliminate risk by the choices they make, and we want them to know (despite what others might say) it is possible to control your sexual passion, because WE did it.

The truth is we were banned by people who have never seen our presentations. Not one single teen (even those who who were sexually active and blew us off) has ever said they think we shouldn't be allowed to tell our story. Everyone who seen it agrees: our story makes a difference. They don't understand why adults are preventing us from showing by our own lives how to be successful at sexual self-control.

And, in all truthfulness, neither do I.

2009 Day of Silence, Day of Truth

This year, Friday, April 17th is the "Day of Silence" sponsored by the Gal Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN). Students, some with tape over their mouth, will hand out cards when called on which state their support for homosexual students who have been bullied into silence.

Monday, April 20th is the "Day of Truth" sponsored by some pro-family groups as a counter-balance. Students will also hand out cards (but not during class) which promote respectful dialogue about homosexuality.

Is it just me, or does this seem like a crazy environment for CHILDREN to learn? I saw one "testimony" about a substitute teacher who couldn't be silent so he opted for a t-shirt that promoted homosexuality and "educated his EIGHTH GRADERS."

I know some eighth graders. They are 12 and 13... they are worried about pimples, braces, teasing, new body odors and algebra. Do we really need to add the politics of sex to their day?

I have very strong beliefs (as I bet you do) about homosexuality and its impact on people and society. Debating those issues gets adults wound up and heated. What does it do to children who are accustomed to being directed and guided by adults? How does a 13-year-old reconcile a favorite teacher's beliefs when they conflict with what mom or dad says? Is it fair to ask the child to "take sides"... and then expect them to just go about their day?

Isn't forcing children to take sides in such a contentious forum a form of bullying too?

I'm going to default to what I have said in the past and will argue in the future. There are NO benefits to adolescent sexual activity.

NONE.

Sexual behavior in teens is linked to:

• emotional problems like depression and suicidal thoughts
• risky behavior like smoking, drinking and drug abuse
• higher drop-out rates
• difficulty bonding in future relationships
• non-martial pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections

I don't see any benefit to children to bring the politics of sex into their classroom. It's disruptive to the children and the learning process. Desensitizing their natural modesty and directing their thoughts to the gamut of sexual behaviors for a day (and in some schools for a week) certainly undermines any efforts to help them learn sexual self-control.

They banned sodas and sugary snacks to keep kids from being tempted to eat poorly, but you should see what your child's school can put up to "promote" tolerance of homosexuality.

For more information on the counter-revolution: http://www.dayoftruth.org/main/default.aspx