Devon DickTHE SUNDAY Gleaner's headline 'UWI students at high HIV risk' (August 11, 2002) once again highlights the ineffectiveness of schools' sex education programme. Senior reporter Patricia Watson stated that a high number of students were engaging in unprotected sex, 'although basic knowledge of the disease is relatively high'.
This large-scale survey of 1,252 students done among the supposedly brightest and best students of the nation is alarming but confirms that knowledge about HIV does not automatically lead to a change in attitude and behaviour especially when the main source of sex education is the classroom. Therefore, the 14-point plan for UWI, which includes ensuring, 'that every person in the UWI community has knowledge and behaviours to protect herself/himself from contracting HIV/AIDS' is not the best answer based on the findings of the survey.
Other international surveys have conclusively shown that the classroom is no place for children to learn about sex and relationships. According to the Daily Telegraph of July 3, 2002, two studies done in Canada and the United States published in the respected British Medical Jour-nal found that sex education had no impact on the rate of teenage pregnancy, delaying sexual activity or increasing the use of contraception.
In spite of the evidence, advocates of sex education in school ignore the evidence and do not offer evidence of the effectiveness of their programmes. There was a media campaign recently aimed at influencing the sex attitude and behaviour but what was the result? Who will analyse this well-intentioned programme aimed at responsible sexual practice among the young? Chances are that persons are going to ask for more media blitz about sex education and that more time and teaching resources should go into sex education at school.
There have been other surveys done in the USA that have shown that safe sex efforts for teens have not produced the results and they fail to use them properly if at all. Therefore, it should not surprise the nation that the University's students, who fall into the age group that has the highest number of reported AIDS cases, though having knowledge are not engaging in healthy lifestyles. In 1993, the Ministry of Health launched a campaign, which emphasised condom use as the best way to fight the spread of AIDS. Can anyone say that this has worked? In 1998, the National Family Planning Board, in response to the alarming trend of early sexual activity, advocated for the medical profession to be able to issue contraceptives to children under the age of 16 without parental consent. Was it a good idea to bypass parents?
Research seems to be suggesting that school sexual education is ineffective because relationships are not learned, but experienced. It appears that persons who learn about sexuality and relationships mainly from school are not likely to have a healthy attitude toward sexuality as those whose family and significant others were the main source of sex education.
Opponents of school sex education go further to claim that sex education should not be and cannot be a subject. Frank Furedi, professor of Kent University, elaborates this point by claiming, "From a pedagogic point of view, sex and relationships education has little merit. It is not based on an academic discipline. It lacks a corpus of ideas that can intellectually stimulate children. Unlike genuine subjects such as maths and English, it does not contribute to the development of abstract thought nor does it enhance appreciation for the understanding of life".
It is clear that school sex education does not work and perhaps cannot work as the main means to alter sexual practice of the young. There is no evidence that media campaigns work either. Unfortunately, it does not even appear that sermons from pulpits have the desired effect on sexual attitude and practice. These media can reinforce and complement the message taught in the homes but the family must become the first and primary source of sex education where children will not only be taught but where the practice can be caught.
Furthermore, a campaign that has as its centerpiece the use of condoms for the prevention of contracting HIV/AIDS, though a boon to condom manufacturers, has a serious loophole. What happens when a couple desires to give birth to a child? The couple would have to engage in unprotected sex unless there is going to be artificial insemination. We are told that one unprotected sex can lead to infection, it therefore means that the strategy should not be so focused on condom use but there needs to be a multi-faceted approach to HIV/AIDS prevention. The research to find a cure must be fast-tracked and funded, the reality is that persons will have AIDS and these persons must be affirmed as humans and not treated as outcasts.
In addition, healthy lifestyles must be encouraged in the family. The family, as a basic unit of society, ought to be strengthened so that it can play a leading role in education and the fight against HIV/AIDS.
PS Last week's article claimed that the Honourable Carmen Stewart was the first female to be appointed as Custos but I have been reliably informed by Archdeacon Wright that Ms Carnegie of Westmoreland holds that honour. Apologies to both ladies.
The Rev Devon Dick is pastor of the Boulevard Baptist Church.
