Another Reason We Need Comprehensive Sex Ed
Today on CNN:
Doesn't that seem a little weird to you? We do consider ourselves very advanced -- how does it happen that only Latvia has a higher infant mortality rate than us?
Skipping down, a clue:
There's a lot going on there, eh? I might be hard to figure out exactly what lies behind this -- it could be the lack of health insurance for our poorer citizens, it could be differences in education, in the ability to pay for services ... and it could be All of the Above.
This is a long story, with a lot of facts in it. Mortality of both mothers and infants is terribly higher in developing countries, and the causes are different there from here.
Thinking objectively and intelligently about sex and reproduction seems to be a key here -- that is, comprehensive sex education. You get the feeling that some people want the US to try to beat Latvia for last place -- even our federal government is pushing a content-free educational curriculum that only tells students to avoid sex, not anything about how to make it safer or how to avoid getting pregnant once they do become sexually active. Let's oppose that, ok?
(CNN) -- An estimated 2 million babies die within their first 24 hours each year worldwide and the United States has the second worst newborn mortality rate in the developed world, according to a new report.
American babies are three times more likely to die in their first month as children born in Japan, and newborn mortality is 2.5 times higher in the United States than in Finland, Iceland or Norway, Save the Children researchers found.
Only Latvia, with six deaths per 1,000 live births, has a higher death rate for newborns than the United States, which is tied near the bottom of industrialized nations with Hungary, Malta, Poland and Slovakia with five deaths per 1,000 births. U.S. has second worst newborn death rate in modern world, report says
Doesn't that seem a little weird to you? We do consider ourselves very advanced -- how does it happen that only Latvia has a higher infant mortality rate than us?
Skipping down, a clue:
The report, which analyzed data from governments, research institutions and international agencies, found higher newborn death rates among U.S. minorities and disadvantaged groups. For African-Americans, the mortality rate is nearly double that of the United States as a whole, with 9.3 deaths per 1,000 births.
There's a lot going on there, eh? I might be hard to figure out exactly what lies behind this -- it could be the lack of health insurance for our poorer citizens, it could be differences in education, in the ability to pay for services ... and it could be All of the Above.
This is a long story, with a lot of facts in it. Mortality of both mothers and infants is terribly higher in developing countries, and the causes are different there from here.
The report highlights the three areas it says have the most influence on child well-being: female education, presence of a trained attendant at birth and use of family planning services.
Educated women, the report said, are more likely to marry and give birth later in life, to seek health care and to encourage education for their children, including girls.
The report said that family planning and increased contraception use leads to lower maternal and infant death rates. Many women and children in developing nations, it said, die as a result of births that come at the wrong time -- too close together, too early or too late in the mother's life.
Thinking objectively and intelligently about sex and reproduction seems to be a key here -- that is, comprehensive sex education. You get the feeling that some people want the US to try to beat Latvia for last place -- even our federal government is pushing a content-free educational curriculum that only tells students to avoid sex, not anything about how to make it safer or how to avoid getting pregnant once they do become sexually active. Let's oppose that, ok?
posted by JimK at 3:45 PM
22 Comments:
Did you read the NYTimes magazine piece on Sunday, Contra-Contraception?
I'm completely with you on the critical need for comprehensive sex ed. I just didn't realize that some of the abstinence-only proponents are as far afield of that as to be quietly nurturing anti-contraception perspectives, purportedly even for themselves, perhaps hoping that the abstinence-only curricula are just a stepping stone.
"The report said that family
planning and increased
contraception use leads to lower
maternal and infant death rates."
It's ironic that the current
administration who claims to be
all about leaving no child behind,
insists on leaving American
teenagers behind those in most
other developed nations by funding
medically inaccurate abstinence-
only education programs. With leadership like this, the data show America is becoming a third world country in need of WHO doctors to come and teach us how to keep our teenagers safe.
Could the high mortality rate be a result of the breakdown of the traditional family in the inner city poverty zones? If so, comprehensive sex ed appears to have made a contribution, looking at historical numbers.
Also, consider that Latvia isn't a magnet for millions of the world's huddled masses, who arrive here without a strong support base. We have some of the problems of the Third World countries because we have a steady in-flow of immigrants from these countries. It makes us better in stronger in the long-run but there will always be short-term burdens.
As far as the reference to "some of the abstinence-only proponents", I assume this is a reference to Catholics. Most non-Catholic ab-only proponents have no problem with contraconception within monogamous marital relationships.
Anon said, "Could the high mortality rate be a result of the breakdown of the traditional family in the inner city poverty zones?"
Anon exactly what is a "traditional" family these days????????
freebird
The fact that you would ask speaks volumes about the problem here.
Well given you cannot define it speaks volumes in that "traditional" families are your own personal belief.
A traditional family can be whatever one's family wants it to be.
freebird
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week908/survey.html
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there has been enormous growth in the number of nontraditional families over the past 40 years in America. In 1970, traditional families (married couples with their own children) made up 40% of American households. By 2000, they comprised only 24%. From 1960 to 2000, the number of unmarried couples living together increased tenfold; about 10 million people (8% of U.S. coupled households) are cohabiting with a partner of the opposite sex.
Other highlights from the RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY poll include:
80% of Americans agree it is better for children if their parents are married, but 55% also agree that "love is what makes a family";
49% of Americans agree that married people are happier than unmarried people;
97% of Americans in traditional families and 88% in nontraditional families say they are satisfied with their family life;
49% of nontraditional families and 37% of traditional families say they worry a lot about their children learning the right values;
29% of nontraditional families and 25% of traditional families say they worry a lot about their children maintaining the religious faith they were brought up in;
42% of evangelical Protestants agree that a family suffers if the woman has a full-time job, yet nearly half (48%) of evangelicals in traditional families have two adults who work full time versus 40% of all traditional parents;
64% of Americans agree that it is sometimes necessary to discipline a child with a good hard spanking;
79% of evangelicals and 70% of traditional Catholics say the law should define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, compared to 53% of mainline Protestants and 35% of liberal Catholics;
77% of Americans say sex education classes should provide information about condoms, contraception, and how to make responsible decisions about sex; 18% say abstinence is best and sex ed classes should not provide information about contraception;
82% of Americans say the government should not be involved in programs that encourage marriage.
The nationwide survey of 1,130 adults was conducted July 25-August 7, 2005 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3%.
The survey will be the basis of a four-part RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY series, "Faith and Family in America," to be broadcast over consecutive weeks on PBS stations beginning the weekend of October 28, 2005 (check local listings for broadcast date and time).
freebird
Let's see.
We've seen polls that say 95% of Americans believe teens should be taught to wait until marriage before beginning sexual activity.
We've seen polls that say 2/3 of Americans believe that abstinence should be THE most important element of any sex ed program.
Now, amazingly, KR gives a poll saying 82% of Americans don't believe the government should promote marriage.
Does any feel there's some translation problem?
Anyway, the original point I made seems buttressed. The breakdown of the traditional family, specifically the high incidence of single motherhood and unmarried pregnancies, in impoversihed inner city areas is a major contributor to the high U.S. infant mortality rate. Comp sex ed, inititated in the early 70s, suspiciously coincided with this breakdown.
anon said, "Comp sex ed, inititated in the early 70s, suspiciously coincided with this breakdown"
Same ole Wyatt....tired old mantra
freebird
"Same ole Wyatt....tired old mantra"
same ole non-response from [expletive deleted]
anonymous said: If so, comprehensive sex ed appears to have made a contribution, looking at historical numbers.
Convincing what group of people CRC'rs? Cause you already know everyone else knows better, Wyatt.
"We have some of the problems of the Third World countries because we have a steady in-flow of immigrants from these countries."
*laughs* Yeah, unlike the rest of the industrialised world, which has no immigration-related problems at all! Funny, that!
Anonymous said,
"Could the high mortality rate be a result of the breakdown of the traditional family in the inner city poverty zones? If so, comprehensive sex ed appears to have made a contribution, looking at historical numbers."
This statement is crass, and insidiously classist and racist. The clear reason minorities and poor people have higher rates of infant mortality is poor health care. You should be ashamed for using other people's misery to push your issue of "traditional families."
Robert
"Convincing what group of people CRC'rs? Cause you already know everyone else knows better"
The denial of fact is astonishing. Valueless comp sex ed introduced in the 70s was shortly followed by an increase in teen preganancy which continued to rise incessantly until the introduction of ab programs in the early 90s. A one-year blip might be a statistical anamoly but year after year for two decades strains credulity. The commune mentality failed. Take a toke on your bong and play "Friend of the Devil" on your hi-fi. Remember, there can't be a counter-culture without a culture.
"This statement is crass, and insidiously classist and racist."
Quite an allegation, Robert. I thought we were buddies. Race is irrelevant. Class is obviously not because of the wealth factor.
"The clear reason minorities and poor people have higher rates of infant mortality is poor health care."
Exactly, but, in a traditional family, with a mother focusing on the needs of the children and a father focusing on providing for the family needs, there is more likely to be health insurance. What solution would you propose? Republican plans to build an ownership society would do more to ameliorate poverty than endless streams of income re-distribution as part of the Democratic entitlement scheme.
"You should be ashamed for using other people's misery to push your issue of "traditional families.""
Maybe you should be ashamed to advocate societal conditions that have exasperated poverty since the beginning of our "Great Society". Single motherhood and rootlessness are stress factors that make overcoming poverty extremely difficult.
"*laughs* Yeah, unlike the rest of the industrialised world, which has no immigration-related problems at all! Funny, that!"
I think the topic was Latvia. I'm sure they're beatin' 'em off with a stick at the border there. They'd probably love to have a bright guy like you though, Willie. You ought to move while there's still room.
anonymous said,The denial of fact is astonishing.
When you start bringing in facts then we will talk.
gracie
"Valueless comp sex ed introduced in the 70s was shortly followed by an increase in teen preganancy which continued to rise incessantly until the introduction of ab programs in the early 90s."
There's your facts- start talking.
Provide an example of a "valueless comp sex ed" program.
Wyatt needs to provide ANY EXAMPLE for any of his dribble. Never does and never will.
Anonymous said:
"Exactly, but, in a traditional family, with a mother focusing on the needs of the children and a father focusing on providing for the family needs, there is more likely to be health insurance. What solution would you propose? Republican plans to build an ownership society would do more to ameliorate poverty than endless streams of income re-distribution as part of the Democratic entitlement scheme."
Poor people have inadequate health care whether they are in traditional families or not. Most of my students are in traditional two-parent families, and most do not have health insurance (thus do not seek health care unless they are very sick).
Marriage and family are not the solution to poverty and income-distribution inequality, although they may have some impact (certainly children supported by two incomes are less likely to be in poverty). I'm not sure of what to make of the "ownership society". Home-ownership is good, but I would think that investment by large numbers of people in stocks or securities would create a bubble that would benefit savvy insiders, at put regular investors at risk. My pension plans are supported by the state of Virginia and Fairfax County, and I trust them with my money.
There are several solutions to the health-care crisis. Universal health care (as in Canada, Sweden, Britain) is one; mandatory health insurance such as Massachusetts is instituting is another. But it is a pipedream to think that pro-marriage initiatives or opposing gay relationships will solve the health-care needs of less wealthy people.
add me on msn at cailey_rox@hotmail.com good luck
Post a Comment
<< Home