Sex Ed: Schools' job or parents'?

In my former life as a liberal, I always looked towards government as the agent of action for society's ills. As I became edjamacated in college, I got a little smarter and realized that most problems can be better solved or even prevented when dealt with at the most local level possible. And in looking at my own family, I realized that the most local level sometimes meant not even including government in the equation, because families and communities can exert more influence over the individual than any government entity.

Given that, UW Senior Adam Edlemen editorializes today at the Wisconsin State Journal against making abstinence the "preferred sexual behavior" taught in Wisconsin's schools. Even Edelmen puts in the disclaimor that abstinence is the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease, and also that he believes that "teenage pregnancy and escalating sexually transmitted disease rates can cause major destruction to lives otherwise filled with potential." But he claims that "common sense" dictates that the abstinence policy is not good policy (mull that logic over for a while).

In a sense, Edelmen is right. We shouldn't be teaching abstinence in school. In fact, we shouldn't have to. The people who can have the greatest impact on a child's sexual choices is that child's family, not the school. The schools are short circuiting that to a certain extent by getting involved in sex education. But I am a realist, and I know that there are a great many parents who are for whatever reasons incapable of instilling strong sexual values in their children, be it the parents' own immaturity or irresponsibility, or the fact that the child in question just has a very strong wild or independent streak, or is weak to peer pressure. But the problem created by well meaning individuals like Edelmen is that in their method of getting the schools involved, they are trying to take over sex ed from parents instead of supplementing the weaknesses of some parents. The result is that they make sex seem okay to kids whose parents would otherwise be able to instill the values of abstinence and responsibility to their kids, and all the while helping precious few of the kids whose parents are not able to instill those values. If the schools want to help kids avoid all of the consequences of sex, they have to first support those parents who can instill strong sexual values in their children by promoting abstinence as the first and best choice. They can then supplement that and help the kids who are not instilled with those values by teaching responsibility. I don't know where Edelmen gets his common sense from, but believe it or not, kids are able to control their sexual impulses if they are empowered to do so, and the only way to do that is by teaching abstinence as the first and best sexual choice.