Getting Rid of the Abstinence-Only Approach to Sex-Ed in the U.S. with implications on Massachusetts
WGS 499: Capstone Paper
Preface
Majoring in Women’s Gender Studies (WGS) was not my initial plan. I began my undergraduate journey as an English Communications and Rhetoric major, without a clear idea of what I wanted to do with the degree. However, my economic background drove me to attend college, determined to achieve success. As one of triplets from a single-parent household, I felt a deep responsibility to explore my options and find a career. My mother had worked tirelessly for as long as I could remember, and I owed it to her to pursue higher education.
During my first semester at UMASS Dartmouth (UMD), I decided to add WGS 101 to my schedule, intrigued by the idea of learning about the history of my gender. On the first day of class, I was surprised to discover that my professor appeared to be a man. However, written on the board were the words: "Pronouns: They/Them." They had short black hair, olive skin, a scarf around their neck, and painted nails. I felt like a child ready to dive into a shiny pool of knowledge. It was in this course that I first learned about gender identity as a spectrum and the intersections of oppression with implications on gender. I discovered that gender is not only a social construct but also fluid and free, much like one’s sexuality.
Throughout that course and the WGS classes that followed, I was introduced to new terminology that helped me articulate my identity in ways I had previously struggled with. As one of triplets and a former Jehovah’s Witness, I had difficulty defining who I was and what I stood for as an individual. The WGS courses I took during my undergrad years made these assertions much easier. I came to understand that I am not only a woman but a strong, biracial woman who has blossomed from a low-income, religiously-restricted, single-parent household.
Several WGS courses were particularly influential in shaping my capstone project. WGS 101 set the foundation, but WGS 339 was especially powerful and personal for me. The course focused on women and public policy, where I learned about women’s roles in politics and positions of power, and how these roles have evolved over time. I came to understand that surviving in a patriarchal system requires immense strength and an even stronger community. For my final paper, I wrote about Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) and their implications for the LGBTQ+ community, particularly concerning funding. I researched the history of oppression surrounding women’s reproductive rights and concluded that ART should be federally funded because everyone has a right to a family, regardless of whether it fits the traditional nuclear model. Most importantly, I realized how crucial education and resources are for underserved communities. If my mother hadn’t found information on reproductive rights and IVF, I might never have been conceived. By the end of that semester, I had officially added WGS as my second major.
Another course that had a profound impact on me was WGS 312: Feminist Research Methods. During the Fall of 2020, I learned in-depth about the gaps in research that have negatively affected women’s lives. Historically, women have been excluded from data collection and, as a result, have had little say in research outcomes that directly impact their health. I learned about the effectiveness of quantitative and qualitative data, and how certain methods can distort women’s lived experiences. In past research, one could find traces of sexism, racism, elitism, and bias, rendering the data inconclusive. This is why feminist research is so important—we must continue to bridge these gaps and ensure gender equality (among other things) in research that impacts women and underserved communities. My final project for that class was a research paper on women of color who are also single mothers. I explored reproductive reform and access to sexual health resources, which naturally led me to focus on sexual health education.
My capstone project, in a sense, had been marinating in my mind since taking the courses mentioned above. I developed a deep interest in reproductive rights and access to quality sexual health resources and education. It only made sense to dig deeper, to unearth the seeds planted by our current patriarchal system so long ago—a system that treats equality as a threat and continues to oppress women on a national scale. When I learned that my capstone paper needed to involve women and health, I immediately thought back to my final projects from previous years. What topic could I research where I might uncover gender bias that jeopardizes women’s health? With this in mind, I formed my research question: *Does the current sex education curricula in Massachusetts (MA) promote gender roles and enforce gender bias?* By examining the latest state guidelines for schools in MA, I hoped to uncover specific diction and phrases that might single out young girls, potentially correlating with the high teen pregnancy rates in MA and the U.S. as a whole.
In addition to reviewing the latest state guidelines and policies surrounding sex education, I also conducted an online survey to gather a representative sample of how sex education is functioning in MA. My research paper, therefore, presents both quantitative and qualitative data and analysis. I aimed to incorporate real-life experiences of students in the area, making the survey available to my fellow UMD students and a handful of young adults who attended the West End House Boys and Girls Club of Allston with me. Unfortunately, I only received responses from twenty-two people. However, I believe that this data allows me to draw some generalized conclusions about the state of sex education in MA.
Reflecting on my own sex education experience, I am left deeply disappointed. If I had to describe it in one word, it would be “lacking.” I may have had a course in middle school, but if so, I cannot recall it. However, during my first year of high school, I vividly remember a group of new faces appearing during gym class. They showed us an unfiltered video of a woman giving birth and then guided us through scenarios in which the lesson was firmly about saying no. Although other subjects may have been covered, this is what stood out to me. I had no idea how sex worked, particularly in a same-sex relationship, and knew little about vaginal care, learning many lessons through experience. I would argue that blindly navigating the unknown terrain of one’s body is not the healthiest approach to sex education. Something needs to be done, and fast.
Despite that experience, I am now extremely grateful for my education in the Liberal Arts. It has made the world a less frightening place. The dark, scary areas I never even thought to explore have been illuminated. The intersections of oppression that I face daily have become more easily detectable. I feel empowered, grounded in the knowledge that I am in control of my identity and, therefore, my experience as a woman. While I cannot control all external factors, my education has shown me that change is possible, has happened, and will continue to happen—whether the crumbling patriarchy likes it or not.
Abstract
My research project focuses on sex education in Massachusetts. I began by questioning whether the curriculum was outdated and whether it negatively impacted the health of young and adolescent women. I also wondered if there was a correlation between poor sex education and teen pregnancy, leading me to form my research question: *Does the current sex education curriculum in Massachusetts promote gender roles and enforce gender bias?*
To answer this question, I started by examining the latest legislation on sex education both in Massachusetts and the United States as a whole. I discovered that the government has made a comprehensive approach to sex education available. However, it is up to individual states to implement this approach, as it is not federally enforced. One of the central problems is funding. Historically, the government has funded programs with an abstinence-only approach, emphasizing “just saying no” to premarital sex. These programs were heavily funded during the Bush administration and then again during the Trump administration. The Healthy Youth Act was created to establish mandatory guidelines for schools to follow when teaching sex education. Unfortunately, the bill did not make it past the Committee House.
It has also become evident that the abstinence-only approach is more prevalent in schools located in poorer, urban districts. Schools that teach with an abstinence-only approach tend to neglect topics such as anatomy, birth control options, sexual violence, consent, healthy relationships, and the intersections of identity, including gender and sexual orientation—all of which could be covered in a comprehensive sex education program. Instead, these programs primarily focus on pregnancy and STD prevention.
The current strategy is not effective—pregnancy and STD rates remain significantly high. The pregnancy rate among 15- to 19-year-olds in the United States is one of the highest in developed nations. With the proper resources, we could change this statistic.
In addition to this research and analysis, I conducted an online survey using SurveyMonkey for qualitative data. The respondents consisted of a small group of students who have been affiliated with high schools in Massachusetts.
When asked about the main topics they remembered from their sex education courses, more than half of the respondents mentioned drugs, alcohol, STD prevention, and how to put on a condom. When asked how they felt at the end of the course, more than 80% said they felt confused and uncomfortable. When asked what they would have liked to learn more about, more than half mentioned topics such as gender identity, vaginal care, and other birth control options. These are just a few of the questions I asked.
While my data features only a small number of students with experiences scattered across Massachusetts, it serves as a microcosmic reflection of the status of sex education in the state.
Overall, I did not find gender bias in the sex education framework. The framework includes a comprehensive approach that many states across the U.S. have yet to implement. As a result, adolescent women in urban districts are at greater risk of teen pregnancy and STDs. My proposed plan is to advocate for the United States to abolish the abstinence-only approach so it can no longer be a course of action. I would work with local experts to draft a bill to this effect.
Sex education is not the only factor that influences teen pregnancy. However, if young women and men had access to quality sex education, poor decisions around sex would have a higher chance of being avoided. Sex education should not be influenced by religion or conservative thinking; it should be based on facts.
Research Question + Thesis
To be a woman in America during the twenty-first century can mean many things. However, for the purpose of this paper, being a woman likely means being one of the many faces of systemic inequality. It means fighting the daily struggle to rise above the misogynistic stereotypes embedded in far too many long-standing institutions. Sex education, as it stands today—which is the core subject of this research paper—is being used as a patriarchal tool to devalue and limit young women across the United States, thus threatening their sexual health. For a deeper analysis, my research will frequently narrow its scope to the state of Massachusetts.
This paper will address the following question: *Does the current sex education curriculum in Massachusetts promote gender roles and enforce gender bias?* I will explore this question by highlighting contemporary federal policies and comparing them to state laws on sex education in Massachusetts. Additionally, I will conduct a close reading of the 1999 Massachusetts Comprehensive Health Curriculum Framework. My methodology will include drawing from past research found on databases such as ProQuest and the International Women’s Studies Database, while also collecting qualitative data through surveys conducted with a small pool of Massachusetts students.
I will apply two theoretical feminist lenses: Postmodern feminism and standpoint feminism. These methods will help me determine the mental toll that sex education has taken on students who graduated from public high schools since 2014. Postmodern feminism acknowledges the differences between “word and world, language and social reality” to create a transformative culture free of gendered, racial, and economic oppression (Jaggar, 2015). Postmodernism challenges feminism’s tendencies to universalize and naturalize, rejecting labels, truths, and universally accepted norms. Instead, it recognizes that our categorized experiences are constrained by “available discourse of race, ethnicity, and sexuality” (Jaggar, 2015).
Standpoint feminism, on the other hand, offers essential resources for producing science that is not only epistemically adequate but also more socially responsive (Intemann, 2016). This feminist theory draws knowledge from the experiences of groups who live under intersections of oppression due to institutionalized societal structures. It provides a platform for groups who were previously and purposely excluded from scholarly discourse and research. By studying how the intersections of oppression distinctly influence the life experiences of women, feminist scholars can continue to liberate our society from its shallow pools of knowledge.
To further situate readers with common words and phrases used in this paper, I will highlight some important terminology. The first term is “gender.” Feminist scholar Judith Butler wrote that gender itself is a patriarchal construct, primarily benefiting a heteronormative society. Gender is a social construct because it is assigned to us at birth based on our biology, not our identity. Many do not have a say in their identity until they are able to learn who they are for themselves. Instead, we are conditioned into binary “gender roles,” where a specific set of criteria is established by society. Furthermore, only in a context where heterosexuality is normalized can gender be used as a tool of oppression. Butler stated, “We do not have to agree upon the ‘origins’ of that sense of self to agree that it is ethically obligatory to support and recognize sexed and gendered modes of being that are crucial to a person’s well-being” (Butler, 2020). In other words, it does not matter how one comes to understand their sexual orientation or gender. What matters is that we accept their reality and welcome them into safe spaces. The way people choose to live and identify is their choice. Learning about gender, sex, and biology is crucial to sex education, as it allows for safe discourse about the LGBTQ+ community, who share the same schools as cis- or heteronormative individuals. Sex education cannot be well-rounded if gender and identity are not included.
Finally, there are two popular approaches to sex education. My paper will advocate for the federal government to completely abolish the abstinence-only approach in the United States and mandate comprehensive sex education in every public school. While the work I plan to present is crucial to the feminist movement, I recognize that my time and resources are limited. It is my hope that this research paper will spark more conversations toward gender equality both in and outside the classroom.
What is sex education?
To start, sex education can be defined as the act of giving the youth tools and resources to make healthy and educated decisions about their sexual health. It is important to understand the history of sex education in order to come to terms with the present issues. A misconception of sex education could be traced all the way back to the Victorian Era where a woman did not have legal rights to her own body, especially after marriage (Lavin, 2020). Although there is a great deal to dissect from that period, this paper will consider the uprising of sex education as it became popularized in the 1960s. Traces of the Victorian period could still be found in the 1960s edition of sex education. During this time, teen pregnancy was on the rise alongside the pandemic of HIV/AIDS. This outbreak “shaped the need for and acceptance of formal instruction for adolescents on life-saving topics such as contraception, condoms, and sexually transmitted infections.” (Hall et al, 2016) The outbreak also triggered a negative narrative around sex. Then, in 1981, “abstiennce-only” approaches were being implemented under the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA). The goal of this new program was to “promote premarital ‘chastity and self-discipline.’” (Boonstra, 2009) Teachers were encouraged to sway students away from sex, emphasizing only the negative outcomes of premarital sexual relations. “Just Say No” was the overlying message of the twentieth century. (Carter, 2001) Over the years and especially under the Bush administration, abstinence-led programs were heavily funded by the federal government. Approximately 100 million dollars per year are allotted to these programs. (Karen et all, 2003) The abstinence-only approach was the highest federally funded program in the early 2000’s. It was then heavily funded again by the Trump administration (Hellmann, 2018). Based on this knowledge, it is clear that the distribution of power has been allocated to conservative men. These men, often whom are of White/European descent, place little significance on the voice of women. They believe that women need to be handled rather than equipped to make educated decisions. Rather than federally enforcing abstinence-only education, the government has been shown to influence local and state policies with federal funding. This is systematic oppression in one of its many forms.
Current Legislation
The recent efforts to change the way politics view sex education is growing fatigued. In Massachussetts, the most recent Legislation on sex education was the Bill S.2475, “The Youth Act”. The bill stated that schools must teach sex education with a comprehensive approach and offer parents the opportunity to opt their child out of the course. The bill also stated that sex education must be medically accurate and age-appropiate. Any school district that utilizes the Massachusetts Comprehensive Health Framework must comply with the bill. The bill was a step forward toward quality sex education in Massahussetts. However, the bill did not survive through the House Committee on Ways and Means. No other action has been made since then.
The Youth Act made reference to the 1999 Massachusetts Comprehensive Health Curriculum Framework that has also proved worthy of analysis. The framework document consisted of 105 pages. Throughout the framework, boys and girls were consistently referred to as “students''. There wasn’t any detected division between gender, no gender-specific language. Moreover, when reading under the subheading: Study of Identity, it reads that “students [should] have a class discussion on the influence of group stereotypes about gender roles on identity and self-concept.” So the state document explicitly mentions gender roles and stereotypes thus showing that they mean to eliminate gender bias. This means that the Education Department of Massachussetts has taken strides toward gender equality and has made it their intention to ensure every child recieves quality sex education. However, releasing a document can only do so much without the drive and the resources to see it through. It is important to remember that the Framework serves as a guide or outline of the comprehensive subjects that should be covered when discussing fundamental health education. It is not mandated or effectively enforced. This, of course, is a major issue.
Teen Pregnancy and STDs
Table 1. U.S. teenage pregnancy and birth rates are high compared to other developed countries.
Table 2. Birth rates for females aged 15-19, by race and Hispanic origin of mother: United States, 2016 and 2017
Above, you will find two tables on the teenage pregnancy rates in the United States. Table 1 compares the birth rates in the U.S. to other first-world countries. The data was found and analyzed by professors of the University of Georgia question the validity of an abstience approach to sex education. (Hall, 2011) In Table 1 and Table Two, the pregnancy rate of girls in the U.S. reach massive numbers. From 2002 to 2005, the birth rates of 15-19 years old in the United States was significantly higher than countries such as France, Germany, Netherlands, Canada, and the UK. Out of these countries, the U.S. had almost double the amount of births in 2006 as the second highest birth rate, the UK. Although the rates have dropped in recent years, the United States continues to rank the highest of teen pregnancy rates (Sedgh, 2015). The second table titled: “Birth rates for females aged 15-19, by race and Hispanic origin of mother: United States, 2016 and 2017” shows the disparity rates between young mothers with different ethnic origins. The table shows that Black and Native American women are among the most prone to a teenage pregnancy. Since these minorites tend to live in urban districts, the problem with sex education is clear. They are not recieving the same level of education as wealthier and Whiter districts. With that said, unintended teen pregnancies drastically affect more women than men in every case. The woman is not only responsible for carrying the child for up to nine months but could also be faced with more financial and emotionals burdens than men. Moreover, the probability of a teen mother signing up for welfare assistance, dropping out of school, and battling with neglect is higher than that of men (Johnson, 2020; LeClair, 2006). Without adequate support and resources, an unintended pregnancy has the power to condemn a young woman’s life to hardship and suffering. No coherent person one would want that for any of their daughters, their nieces, or their friends. Everyone deserves the optimal chance at a life of their own choosing.
The U.S. also ranked highest for STD rates. (Hall, 2011) Of these STD cases, HIV ranked high among women ages fiften to nineteen. (LeClair, 2006; Johnson 2020). In 2015, Massachusetts ranked 19th among the 50 states in the number of HIV diagnoses (CDC, 2016). STDs that have led to cervical cancer is also “twice as prevalent in U.S. women as in men” (Johnson, 2020). Women have been systematically suffering for a long time due to poor, abstinence-focused sex education. These programs omit information that could change the outcome of adolescent women in poorer urban school districts. It robs women of the chance to prepare themselves for motherhood and of when to choose to have a baby. Not to mention the emphasis that absitencne-only education places on virginity. “Sexism within sex education can make girls feel ashamed, which can lead them to be less likely to reach out to seek information regarding their sexuality and sexual health” (Johnson, 2020). It is evident that the abstinence-only approach has been proving ineffective for quite a long time and perhaps even contributing to the high pregnancy rates in the U.S. This international and local data shows just how essential comprehensive sex education is for the United States as a whole.
Student Voice
In an effort to conduct my own research that features qualitative data and the lived experience of young individuals, I organized and distributed a online survey on sex education in Massachussetts. Because the questions listed are mostly open-ended, it was my hope that I could draw from the lived experiences of the participants for a well-rounded view of the status of sex education in Massachussetts. Of the twenty-two participants, the birth year ranged from 1993-2002. That means that they are between 18-27 years old. Below, you will find the questions I posed in my survey.
In what month and year were you born?
What is your gender identity/ preferred pronouns?
Have you taken a sex edcucation course at school?
At what school & in which grade did you take the course? If you did not take the course at all, name your high school then continue onto question 10.
What are some of the main topics you remember from the course? Detail one particular learning experience.
Can you recall learning about virginity and abstinence? Please elaborate.
Can you describe how you felt about sex education at the conclusion of the course? Did the course answer all your questions about sex?
Do you know of anything regarding sexual health that your course did not cover?
Looking back, what, if anything, would you change about the course you took? How would you want the youth of today to be educated on sexual health?
Who should assume more responsibility for the conversation about sexual health: parents, local schools and state governments, the federal government, or others? Why?
Almost 70% of participants identified as female with “she/her” pronouns. 90% of participants took a sex education course. Out of those, more than half took their sex education course in high school. Four participants, all that identify as male, said they didn’t remember what they learned. More than half said what they learned was centered around drugs and abstinence. How to put on a condom was the huge overall emphasis. 60% of those who took sex ed said that all their questions were not answered, whereas 25% said they weren’t sure. A majority of the 60% said they were left feeling uncomfortable and confused. When asked what they would change about future sex education courses, one respondent wrote: “I would add more knowledge about sex to not make it a fearful thing, but rather something normal for humans, while also being honest about the risks if choosing to engage in sexual activity.” Another wrote: “I hope they change the talk in general. Make sure that they actually educate you on sex and how both bodies work instead of focusing on the importance of abstinence and not shame sex.” Two respondents wrote: “everything!” Finally, when asked who should assume responsibility/control over the sex education cirriculum, 36% said parents, state, and the federal government should play a role. 27% said it should be up to the state and 18% said the responsibility should be on the parents.
From this information, a few things can be synthesized. Firstly, the quality of sex education in Massachussetts is disproportionately scattered. There is no common thread of knowledge that the respondents shared. Let this data serve as a microscoptic reflection of the dissaray of sex education in Massachussetts. Sex education cannot prove to be effective when different communities are receiving different information. In order to combat teen pregnancy and the high rate of STDs, students need to be on the same page. They deserve medical acuracy and a fact-driven comprehensive ciriculum. For that to be done, federal action needs to be taken.
Action Plan
To address the issue within sex education in Massachusetts, I propose a bill be drafted that abolishes the abstinence-only approach. If passed, it will become illegal to teach sex education with this approach in schools. I believe this effort could be successful because studies have shown that 83% of American adults believe that adolescents should receive information about safe sexual health and STD prevention even if they are not yet sexually active. (Mayer, 1996-97) This will work in my favor as state politicians should urgently address the needs of its constituents. We know this is not the case all the time. However, working with Planned Parenthood and the Massachusetts Office of Sexual Health and Youth Development, we can get the bill looked at by a state representative. While the rep presents the bill, grassroots campaigns would be ignited all over Massachusetts so that we could get our bill onto the political agenda. Even after the bill is passed, implementation is critical. It is the driving force between what has been done and whats needs to be done. All we essentially require is for the nurses, teachers. And program insturctors to deliver a sex education course with a holistic, comprehensive approach.
Conclusion
It is clear that the youth of the United States are being disproportionately affected by poor sex education. As of 2019, less than 50% of students in high school have had access to the sixteen CDC-recommended topics of comprehensive sex education (Johnson, 2020). Moreover, young women in urban districts have been at greater risks of teen pregnancy and/or STDs beacuse of the omission of knowledge.. Studies have shown that poorer states with low abortion rates and high pregnancy rates have correlated with “a higher degree of religiosity” (Hall et al, 2011). This means that an abstinence-only approach primarily persists to this day because of religious and financial pressures. Religious affliants are more concerned with the “virginity” of a woman, thus strengthening rape culture and slut-shaming. Finances are often distributed to schools in districts with a greater White population, giving people of color a disadvantage when it comes to protecting themselves and discovering their identities and sexuality. If these systematic entities were no longer stakeholders in decisions around sex education, young men and women across the United States would equally learn to engage in safe sexual practices.
Although there was no gender bias found in the Massachusetts Framework or latest legislation, there is bias where there is inadequate information. The risk of failure spikes significantly when one cannot arm themselves with the tools to succeed. Based on the data above, it is clear that more work needs to be done and the voices of equality need to be heard. That being said, sex education is not the only factor that influences teen pregnancy. Teen sexual activity is driven by a complex interaction of forces, including familial, social, and economic factors. There is no one solution to avoiding a teenage pregnancy. However, if young women and men had access to quality sex education, poor decisions around sex would have a higher chance of being avoided. When poor decisions are avoided, the likelihood that young women finish high school would increase. Even more so, the likelihood of them continuing to college and starting a career would increase. Less babies would mean for a more controllable population, one that uses less energy and leaves less waste. In other words, a decreasing teen pregnancy rate would also be beneficial for the environment. There are several advantages to eliminating the factors that inevitably lead to an unplanned teen pregnancy. Therefore it should be in the interest of the federal government to make the necessary strides to abolish the abstinence-only approach.
Furthermore, the conversation of sex education has roots in several social movements. Take for example, the #MeToo movement. This movement advanced through live television and social media. Women across the nation, young and old, were watching the events unfold before their very eyes and many were left to internalize and interpret the movement for themselves. With a comprehensive sex education, the gap between the world and the classroom could be bridged together. It can serve as a practical solution to dismantling rape culture and misinformation. Healthy conversations could be had around educators who can accurately facilitate. Sex education continues to contain the history of women and the LGBTQ+ community. Our societies are constantly evolving and the youth at least deserve the chance to keep up and stay informed. With the help of the federal government, supporting institutions, and family heads, together, sex education can positively equip the minds of the youth to come.
Work Cited
Hall, K. S., McDermott Sales, J., Komro, K. A., & Santelli, J. (2016). The State of Sex Education in the United States. The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 58(6), 595–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.03.032
Boonstra HD. (2009) Advocates call for a new approach after the era of ‘Abstinence-Only’ sex education. Guttmacher Policy Rev. 12:1–6. [Google Scholar]
Carter, J. (2001). Birds, Bees, and Venereal Disease: Toward an Intellectual History of Sex Education. Journal of the History of Sexuality, 10(2), 213-249. Retrieved April 22, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3704815
Karen (Kay) Perrin, & DeJoy, S. B. (2003). Abstinence-only education: How we got here and where we're going. Journal of Public Health Policy, 24(3), 445-59. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.umassd.edu/10.2307/3343387
Williams, Cristan, and Judith Butler. (2020) “Gender Performance: The TransAdvocate Interviews Judith Butler.” TransAdvocate, www.transadvocate.com/gender-performance-the-transadvocate-interviews-judith-butler_n_13652.htm.
Ebert, T. (1991). The "Difference" of Postmodern Feminism. College English, 53(8), 886-904. doi:10.2307/377692
Intemann, Kristen. (2016) “Feminist Standpoint .” The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory. Disch, Oxford University Press.
“Bill S.2475 191st (2019 - 2020).” Bill S.2475, Jan. 2020, malegislature.gov/Bills/191/S2475.
Mayer R. 1996-97 trends in opposition to comprehensive sexuality education in public schools in the United States. SIECUS Rep. 1997 Aug-Sep;25(6):20-6. PMID: 12321003.
Stanger-Hall, Kathrin F., and David W. Hall.(2011) “Abstinence-Only Education and Teen Pregnancy Rates: Why We Need Comprehensive Sex Education in the U.S.” PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0024658.
“Office of Sexual Health and Youth Development.” Mass.gov, www.mass.gov/orgs/office-of-sexual-health-and-youth-development.
Gomes, Celine. (May 2021) “Sex Education Survey Results.” SurveyMonkey, www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-RQ9JRTGL9/.
Johnson, Eliana R. (2020) "Sex Education in the United States: Implications for Sexual Health and Health
Policy," The Corinthian: Vol. 20 , Article 14. Available at: https://kb.gcsu.edu/thecorinthian/vol20/iss1/14
LeClair, D. (2006). Let's talk about sex honestly: Why federal abstinence-only-until-marriage education programs discriminate against girls, are bad public policy, and should be overturned. Wisconsin Women's Law Journal, 21, 291–322.
Sedgh, G., Finer, L. B., Bankole, A., Eilers, M. A., & Singh, S. (2015). Adolescent pregnancy, birth, and abortion rates across countries: levels and recent trends. The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 56(2), 223–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.09.007
Jaggar, A. M. (2015). Just methods: An interdisciplinary feminist reader. Routledge.
Joyce A. Martin, Brady E. Hamilton, and Michelle J.K. Osterman. (2019). “Births in the United States, 2018.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 24 July 2019, www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db346.htm.
Lavin, Lauren A. (2020). "The History of Sex Education in the United States: With Application to South Dakota" Honors Thesis. 119. https://red.library.usd.edu/honors-thesis/119
Hellmann, Jessie. (20 Apr. 2018) “Trump Admin Announces Abstinence-Focused Overhaul of Teen Pregnancy Program.” TheHill, thehill.com/policy/healthcare/384208-trump-admin-announces-abstinence-focused-overhaul-of-teen-pregnancy.
