Jessica Williams-DiederichENG 102 sm2Shelly RodrigoJuly 16, 2007WP# 2 DraftAnnotated Bibliography The issue I am researching for this project is abstinence-only sex education in the United States. This is such an important issue because in the U.S. the teenage pregnancy rate is rising and there is a rapid spread of sexually transmitted diseases sweeping the youth. The health and safety of the nation’s teens are at risk. This subject is surrounded by controversy because sex is risqué, sex is forbidden, sex is uncomfortable to talk about. Most Americans may not want to discuss the issue of sex, but they for certain have an opinion about it. These opinions differ greatly from person to person. Sex is a very individual thing and when people try to influence others’ choices controversy arises. Some people do not think anyone should have sex until marriage and that is why they believe teaching abstinence-only education is the only way. They believe if comprehensive sex education is taught students will be encouraged to have sex. Other people believe that people should not have sex until marriage, but should still be given information about contraceptives and safe-sex in case they do decide to engage in sexual activities. There are also those individuals who think that sex education should be kept out of schools completely. The spectrum of opinion on this matter is wide.Boonstra, H. (April 2002).Legislators craft alternative vision of sex education to counter abstinence-only drive. (Issues & Implications). The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 5, p1(3). Retrieved July 14, 2007, from Health Reference Center Academic via Thomson Gale, http://find.galegroup.com.ezp.mc.maricopa.edu/itx/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC- Documents&type=retrieve&tabID=T003&prodId =HRCA&docId=A86042335&source=gale&userGroupName=mcc_mesa&a mp;version=1.0.This source expresses the need to make a change to abstinence-only sex education in the United States. It gives statistics which show that teen pregnancy rates and STD spread rates are increasing. The source also discusses attempts that are being made to reform sex education and broaden it. In this source Boonstra is conveying that she believes abstinence-only sex education has been failing and needs to be changed. I believe that Boonstra is a strong advocate for changing abstinence-only sex education. Because of this her goals are definitely to promote a change; not so much inform about what good abstinence-only sex education has done. This source will be helpful in my research paper because it has good statistics regarding the rise in teen pregnancy rate and STD spread.Caplan, A. (2005). Abstinence-only sex education defies common sense. MSNBC. Retrieved on July 7, 2007, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9504871/.This site discusses how illogical it is to have abstinence only sex education. It discusses how tax dollars are being wasted supporting such programs. It also gives statistics for why the programs are a waste or money and why they are not working. The author definitely holds his opinion against abstinence-only education programs which makes me hesitant to use this source. I believe he feels so strongly against it because the results that he has found prove that abstinence-only programs are essentially a waste of money. Because the research and statistics support the author’s beliefs I think it will be okay to use in my paper to support my cause.Clark, M., Devaney, B., Fortson, K., Trenholm, C., Quay, K., & Wheeler, J.(2007). Impacts of four title v, section 510 abstinence education programs. Final report. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Retrieved July 9, 2007, from ERIC database, http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?_nfpb=true&ERICExtSearch_Sear chValue_0=teen+sex&searchtype=keyword&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=kw&_page Label=RecordDetails&objectId=0900019b8015dfd0&accno=ED496286&_nfls=false.This source is a case study of four different abstinence-only sex education programs. The findings basically conclude that abstinence-only sex education has no effect on the abstinence of America’s youth. This source also concludes that the unprotected sex rate of teenagers is not increased from abstinence-only programs. There are several graphs and charts to depict the results. I feel that this source is unbiased because the research is done by a “third party” figure that is strictly doing research. It seems very legitimate. I can use their findings to strengthen my argument against abstinence-only programs.Howell, M. (2007). Advocates for youth and SIECUS applaud the introduction of the responsible education about life (REAL) act. Retrieved July 16, 2007, from http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/news/press/032207.htm.This source is a webpage developed by Advocates for Youth and the page in general leads to several different topics about comprehensive-sex education programs. This specific link discuses the Responsible Education About Life (REAL) Act; a new act presented to Congress about comprehensive sex education. This source is biased in the fact that it is solely for the promotion of safe-sex education and the abolition of abstinence-only programs. I feel like this will be a good resource for my paper because it will help me provide other suggestions to abstinence- only education.National politics & policy Three federally funded abstinence-only sex education programs instill 'fear' in students, teach false information, SEICUS report says. (2005). The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved July 16, 2007, from http://www.kaisernetwork.org/Daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=32771.This source discusses how some abstinence-only sex education programs use fear and scare-tactics to teach sex education. This form of teaching belittles teenagers and could potentially make them feel bad or uncomfortable because they choose to be sexually active. This source is pretty much one sided. It does however focus on three different programs giving it more credibility than just attacking abstinence-only sex education in general; it gives specific examples with research.Q: Should Congress be giving more financial support to abstinence-only sex education? YES: Abstinence is working to decrease teen pregnancy and is building character among our nation's youth.(SYMPOSIUM). (Nov 10, 2003). Insight on the News, p46. Retrieved July 14, 2007, from InfoTrac OneFile via Thomson Gale, http://find.galegroup.com.ezp.mc.maricopa.edu/itx/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC- Documents&type=retrieve&tabID=T003&prodId=ITOF&docId=A109871 310&source=gale&userGroupName=mcc_mesa&version=1.0.This source describes how abstinence-only sex education is beneficial to the youth of the United States. Kathleen Tsubata, who wrote the byline for this source, is an AIDS prevention activist and goes around to churches, high schools, etc. to teach about AIDS and HIV. She believes that abstinence-only sex education is the best path to follow and is a lot better than educating teenagers about condoms etc. because teenagers do not have fully developed brains and process information differently than adults. Her argument seems extremely opinionated and “one-sided”. I could use this source to illustrate some points about why abstinence-only sex education is good; but I don’t see myself using a lot of the information presented because I feel it is extremely biased.Report shows abstinence-only education program not more effective. (Jan 29, 2004). Women's Health Weekly, p14. Retrieved July 14, 2007, from Health Reference Center Academic via Thomson Gale, http://find.galegroup.com.ezp.mc.maricopa.edu/itx/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC- Documents&type=retrieve&tabID=T003&prodId=HRCA&docI d=A112558864&source=gale&userGroupName=mcc_mesa&version=1.0.This source is a magazine article that I found online. It discusses how abstinence- only sex education is not working. It talks about how those types of programs should be broadened to include more information about contraception. This article also talks about the increase in sexual activity of teenagers. I feel that this source is definitely supporting a change in abstinence-only programs, but does so in an unbiased way by presenting information about the good of abstinence-only sex education programs as well. However, this article specifically refers to abstinence-only sex education programs and information related to the topic only for the state of Minnesota. I still feel like there is some good information that will support my argument in my research paper.Rose, S. (2005). Going too far? Sex, sin and social policy. Social Forces, 84 (2). Retrieved July 16, 2007, from Cline Library Research Resources, http://libproxy.nau.edu:4436/cid=clineli&wfn=wf_muse&sess=session%3D216.147.209. 75.108051184636938317%3B%20PIA_history%3D221480700%3B%20PIA_user%3D2 14900252%3B%20PIA_last%3Dpia.cgi%253Faction%253Dnavigate%2526search_id%2 53D221480700%2526min%253D1%2526show%253D10&addr=10.10.22.81&url=http:// muse.j.This source mainly focuses on the Religious Right of America social policy and their involvement in the sex education of America (for the better and the worse). It also discusses the ongoing debate between abstinence-only sex education programs and comprehensive sex education programs. The main perspective portrayed is that there should be more abstinence-only PLUS or comprehensive sex education programs taught in the United States because abstinence-only is not working (she is leaning more towards the middle ground). Rose conducted a personal field study to find the results and I believe them to be fair and unbiased. She is in the middle on the issue, which is a new angle I could use for my research paper.After looking avidly for the many different perspectives on abstinence-only sex education programs I have come to realize that there is almost no middle ground. There are two extremes to this argument... 1) that abstinence-only sex education is the only method of preventing teens from having sex and getting pregnant or contracting diseases or 2) that comprehensive sex education is the only way that sex should be taught to teenagers because it promotes abstinence, but educates teens about how to be safe and protect themselves. The latter could be considered a middle ground because it is not in complete opposition to abstinence-only sex education and is not promoting that teenagers be taught sexual positions and encouraged to go out and have as much sex as possible. It is however a very radical change to abstinence-only sex education and that is why it is the other radical end of this spectrum. There are also people that believe that sex education should not be taught at all in schools, but the majority of the argument lies in abstinence-only or comprehensive sex education programs. That is why I don’t feel it is an extreme of this argument. I will definitely make sure to mention it in my paper, but it is not a main focus because the majority of people are fighting for abstinence or comprehensive. I think it will be tricky, because this topic is so personal and so controversial, to find sources that are not completely biased. Terribly biased sources will not go to support my cause or my credibility.
There were a few revisions that helped me a lot this this assignment. There were certain spots that I was a little confused on and the peer reviews helped me out greatly in figuring out how to solve my problems. This bibliography was a lot of hard work, but it was well worth it. I learned a lot about how to do APA style citations etc. It will be very very helpful in future papers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment