Modification in Sex Education Curricula in Several States Led by GOP

Numerous state and local agencies have relinquished substantial federal grants originally intended for overseeing adolescent sexual behavior and efforts to reduce rates of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

This trend signifies a broader shift, predominantly in states with Republican-controlled legislatures, towards more stringent regulation of sex education in K-12 schools. These legislative actions are part of a larger movement to bolster parental rights and remove LGBTQ+ related content from educational environments, themes that are prominent in the current GOP presidential campaign.

Health professionals express concern that students may not receive reliable education on adolescent development, safe sexual conduct, and relationship violence—topics that have gained even more relevance given the rise in sexually transmitted diseases post-pandemic and increasing limitations on abortion access.

Anne-Marie Amies Oelschlager, an adolescent gynecologist at Seattle Children’s Hospital, emphasized the importance of informed adults in providing accurate information to the youth, as opposed to unreliable sources such as social media. “The risk escalates when we cease discussing these issues,” she noted.

Despite a decline in sexual activity among teenagers, as reported in a 2021 government survey, data from the same year also indicated that adolescents and young adults constituted half of all people diagnosed with sexually transmitted diseases. Language and perceptions regarding sexuality are evolving for the youngest generations.

Recent legislative enactments have introduced further restrictions on sex education. For instance, Indiana has prohibited the teaching of human sexuality before the fourth grade, and Arkansas has similarly restricted education on sexual reproduction or intercourse prior to the fifth grade. In Kentucky, teaching about sexuality or sexually transmitted diseases before the sixth grade is prohibited, with parental consent required for older students. Several states now mandate that parents must actively opt in for their children to receive such education.

In Florida, the state mandates the approval of materials related to reproductive health, human sexuality, and sexually transmitted diseases across all grade levels. The curriculum was scheduled for a state review by the end of September.

Proponents of comprehensive sex education argue that early restrictions may impede children from acquiring basic knowledge that is built upon in subsequent years. Alison Macklin, director of policy and advocacy at the progressive sex education organization SIECUS, equated this foundational knowledge to early mathematics education, arguing that students must understand basic concepts to prepare for more advanced topics like puberty.

In contrast, organizations like The Family Foundation in Kentucky, a Christian advocacy group, argue that the laws provide a protective baseline, enabling parents to review the curriculum and decide if they wish their children to participate.

Federal guidelines for age-appropriate and evidence-based sexual health curricula exist, but state laws and local implementations vary widely. Twenty-eight states mandate sex education, and 35 states require HIV education, with most states allowing an opt-out provision for parents. While some states have curtailed sex education programs, others like Massachusetts have recently updated their comprehensive and inclusive sexual health education guidelines.

Federal agencies such as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services allocate millions in grants aimed at tracking teen behavior and promoting both abstinence and contraception. However, states like Idaho and New Hampshire have rejected or withdrawn from these programs, and six states have ceased to participate in biennial youth surveys as of March 2022.

Kathleen Ethier, director of the CDC’s Division of Adolescent and School Health, reaffirmed the agency’s commitment to promoting science-based practices and collecting data on youth health challenges. Ethier acknowledged a persistent gap between federal recommendations and state and local policies but expressed more concern about the overall school environment than any particular health class.

Nonprofit organizations like Teen Health Mississippi are stepping in to fill the gaps, offering “abstinence-plus” programs in about a quarter of Mississippi’s counties. These programs allow for education on contraception in addition to abstinence, though the adoption rate suggests that many young people are not receiving this education, noted Hope Crenshaw, the organization’s director.

Kayla Smith, an 18-year-old student at the University of Mississippi, highlighted the insufficiency of abstinence-only curricula, lamenting the lack of comprehensive education on safe and informed health choices.

This article is part of a two-part series on sex education in the U.S., with an upcoming story focusing on concerns related to the inclusion of LGBTQ+ students in health classes.

Contributors to this report include Holly Ramer in Concord, New Hampshire, and Rebecca Boone in Boise, Idaho.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Sex Education in GOP-led States

More about Sex Education in GOP-led States

• CDC’s Division of Adolescent and School Health
• Guttmacher Institute’s State Laws and Policies
• SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change
• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program
• The Family Foundation of Kentucky
• State Legislation Tracker on Education
• American Academy of Pediatrics on Sexuality Education