Advanced search
Publication Cover

Sex Education

Sexuality, Society and Learning
Volume 20, 2020 - Issue 5
1,163
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Article

‘It is our duty:’ understanding parents’ perspectives on reproductive and sexual health education

, ORCID Icon, &
Pages 535-551
Received 02 Apr 2019
Accepted 11 Dec 2019
Published online: 07 Jan 2020

ABSTRACT

South Carolina ranks 16th in the USA for highest rates of teenage pregnancy. The South Carolina Comprehensive Health Education Act (CHEA) does not require medically accurate, unbiased, culturally appropriate materials, and varies greatly in compliance and implementation. This study aimed to better understand parents’ perspectives in one county in South Carolina regarding reproductive and sexual health education. A total of 484 parents responded to a qualitative questionnaire, collectively representing 798 students. Researchers conducted a thematic analysis to organise the data. Main themes identified include comprehensive reproductive and sexual health education as a duty; dispelling the myth of abstinence-only education; and the value of comprehensive reproductive and sexual health education. Parents described teaching reproductive sexual health education in public schools as a ‘duty.’ Furthermore, parents rejected the idea that abstinence-only education is effective and believed reproductive and sexual health education should be taught without the influence of religion. Parents valued inclusive reproductive and sexual health education, covering a robust set of topics. Findings from the study provide evidence for the need to update current reproductive and sexual health education materials and legislation to meet parental demands and reduce youth sexual and reproductive health disparities.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank members of the Women’s Health Research Team at the College of Charleston and the Charleston County Teen Pregnancy Prevention Council for their support and collaboration on the project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This project was supported, in part, by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the US National Institutes of Health under Grant Number UL1 TR001450. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
EUR 40.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
EUR 137.00 Add to cart

Purchase access via tokens

  • Choose from packages of 10, 20, and 30 tokens
  • Can use on articles across multiple libraries & subject collections
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded & printed
From EUR 400.00
per package
Learn more
* Local tax will be added as applicable
 

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.