buy custom The Controversy Over Sex Education essay

buy custom The Controversy Over Sex Education essay One of the most controversial issues today is sex education. This is an issue that affects nearly every American family. Nearly nine out of ten public school students have at least one sex education course at some time between 7th and 12th grade, and 95% of public secondary schools teach some form of sex education (Sex Education in, 2002). The purpose of sex education classes is to give students information that will help them avoid sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and unwanted pregnancies. The debate is focused around two alternatives, abstinence-only education and comprehensive sex education. Abstinence-only education teaches children to abstain from sex until they are married. Abstinence, proponents of this alternative say, is the only way to be totally safe from STDs and unwanted pregnancy. Comprehensive sex education teaches children about contraception as well as abstinence as a means of birth control and disease prevention. History of the Controversy The first step to understanding the controversy over what type sex education is best is to understand why sex education is needed. There are two reasons: disease prevention and the prevention of unwanted pregnancies. Sexually transmitted diseases, or STDs, are a widespread health problem in the United States. In 2009, 1,244,180 cases of Chlamydia trachomatis infection, 301,174 cases of gonorrhea, 13,997 cases of PS syphilis were reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The number of Chlamydia trachomatis infections is the largest number of cases ever reported to CDC for any condition (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2010). A total of 35, 825 new AIDs cases were diagnosed in 2009 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011). These numbers show that it is important to give young people education that can help them make good decisions and avoid these diseases. When the AIDS epidemic began, states began to pass laws requiring sex education classes. Federal involvement has been in the form of funding for these programs, beginning in 1988. In 1996, Congress passed a law making funds available to states for abstinence-only education. In a 1999 survey of principals, 58% said that their school had a comprehensive sex education policy, while 34% said their school had an abstinence-only policy. (Sex Education in, 2002). Current Controversy Those wo support the abstinence-only method of sex education believe that including information about contraception undermines the message that abstinence from sexual intercourse is the only totally reliable way to avoid STDs and unwanted pregnancy. They argue that talk of safe sex encourages children to have sex at a young age. Many also argue that if students have sex education classes early on, this may cause them to start thinking about sex at an earlier age than they would have otherwise, leading to an increase in teen pregnancies and STDs. Often these people oppose the inclusion of material about homosexuality, bisexuality, and other alternative lifestyles in the sex education curriculum. Further inflaming the issue is the fact that many of the people who oppose the more comprehensive approach to sex education do so for religious reasons. These people are morally opposed to these topics being discussed in the schools and feel that their children are being taught values incompat ible with their own. People who support comprehensive sex education may agree that children should abstain from sex until they are ready for sexual activity. They disagree with abstinence-only supporters about the teaching of contraception methods, however. They feel that it is imperative to teach young people about contraception because many of those young people are already having sex, and many of those who aren't already will choose to do, even if they are taught that abstinence is the best policy. Thus, supporters of comprehensive sex education fear that if young people are not taught proper methods of contraception, more teens will contract STDs or become pregnant at an age when they are not yet ready to care for a child. Also, many homosexual rights advocates oppose abstinence-only programs because these programs teach that a monogamous heterosexual marriage is the only acceptable way to prevent disease. Studies on the Effects of Sex Education on Teen STD and Pregnancy Rates Gerald Oettinger (1999) found that comprehensive sex education was associated with an increase in the number of female students who had sex at a young age, and a small increase in the teen pregnancy rate. These increases were larger for those who received sex education at an earlier age. This supports the claims of the supporters of abstinence-only education that teaching students about contraception encourages risky behavior. Another study found that an abstinence-only program reduced the probability of a teen having sexuall intercourse during the two-year study period from 48.5% to 33.5%. This study also percentages of teens who used condoms when they had sex was the same whether the teens had received abstinence-only education, comprehensive sex education, or no sex education. The children in this study were between 11 and 15 years old, and the average age was 12.2 years. (Jemmott, Jemmott, and Fong 2010) This study shows that abstinence-only programs can delay the time at which teens begin having sex, thus reducing their exposure to disease. A study of the effects of condom distribution to teens found that teens who participated in the program were no more likely to begin having sex at an early age than those who did not (Sellers, McGraw and McKinlay 1994). This contradicts the Oettinger study and supports the contention of comprehensive sex education advocates that teaching children about contraception does not encourage sexual activity. Another study (Mueller, Gavin, and Kulkarni 2008) showed that both boys and girls who had received comprehensive sex education were less likely to have sexual intercourse than those who had not had sex education, and that girls who had sex education were more likely to use birth control than those who did not have sex education. This also contradicts the study by Oettinger. Possible Solutions Regardless of the solution that is chosen, a large group of American citizens will be unhappy with the choice. Such conflicts are inevitable when nearly all children are compelled to attend schools run by a single government. There are some compromises already being made, however. There are now abstinence plus curricula that teach abstinence as the only way to eliminate the risk of pregnancy or infection, but with information on contraception as a way to reduce risk for those who choose to have sex (Sex Education in 2002 ). The conflicting research may also show a partial solution. The Oettinger (1999) study showed that the increase in sexual activity for students receiving comprehensive sex education was greater for those who had sex education early in adolescence. The children who were subjects of the other study (Jemmott, Jemmott, and Fong 2010) that showed an increase in sexual activity had an average age of 12.2. Perhaps it would be best to give younger students an abstinence only education and give older teens a more comprehensive sex education. Buy custom The Controversy Over Sex Education essay

The Battle of Alam Halfa in North Africa During WW II

The Battle of Alam Halfa in North Africa During WW II The Battle of Alam Halfa was fought from August 30 to September 5, 1942, during World War IIs Western Desert Campaign. Armies Commanders Allies Lieutenant General Bernard Montgomery4 divisions, XIII Corps, Eighth Army Axis Field Marshal Erwin Rommel6 divisions, Panzer Armee Afrika Background Leading to the Battle With the conclusion of the First Battle of El Alamein in July 1942, both British and Axis forces in North Africa paused to rest and refit. On the British side, Prime Minister Winston Churchill travelled to Cairo and relieved Commander-in-Chief Middle East Command General Claude Auchinleck and replacing him with General Sir Harold Alexander. Command of the British Eight Army at El Alamein ultimately was given to Lieutenant General Bernard Montgomery. Assessing the situation at El Alamein, Montgomery found that the front was constricted to a narrow line running from the coast to the impassable Qattara Depression. Montgomerys Plan To defend this line, three infantry divisions from XXX Corps were positioned on ridges running from the coast south to Ruweisat Ridge. To the south of the ridge, the 2nd New Zealand Division was similarly fortified along a line ending at Alam Nayil. In each case, the infantry was protected by extensive minefields and artillery support. The final twelve miles from Alam Nayil to the depression was featureless and difficult to defend. For this area, Montgomery ordered that minefields and wire be laid, with the 7th Motor Brigade Group and 4th Light Armoured Brigade of the 7th Armoured Division in position behind. When attacked, these two brigades were to inflict maximum casualties before falling back. Montgomery established his main defensive line along the ridges running east from Alam Nayil, most notably Alam Halfa Ridge. It was here that he positioned the bulk of his medium and heavy armor along with anti-tank guns and artillery. It was Montgomerys intention to entice Field Marshal Erwin Rommel to attack through this southern corridor and then defeat him in a defensive battle. As British forces assumed their positions, they were augmented by the arrival of reinforcements and new equipment as convoys reached Egypt. Rommels Advance Across the sands, Rommels situation was growing desperate as his supply situation worsened. While he advance across the desert had seen him win stunning victories over the British, it had badly extended his supply lines. Requesting 6,000 tons of fuel and 2,500 tons of ammunition from Italy for his planned offensive, Allied forces succeeded in sinking over half of the ships dispatched across the Mediterranean. As a result, only 1,500 tons of fuel reached Rommel by the end of August. Aware of Montgomerys growing strength, Rommel felt compelled to attack with the hope of winning a quick victory. Constrained by the terrain, Rommel planned to push the 15th and 21st Panzer Divisions, along with the 90th Light Infantry through the southern sector, while the bulk of his other forces demonstrated against the British front to the north. Once through the minefields, his men would push east before turning north to sever Montgomerys supply lines. Moving forward on the night of August 30, Rommels attack quickly encountered difficulty. Spotted by the Royal Air Force, British aircraft began attacking the advancing Germans as well as directing artillery fire on their line of advance. The Germans Held Reaching the minefields, the Germans found them to be much more extensive than anticipated. Slowly working through them, they came under intense fire from the 7th Armoured Division and British aircraft which exacted a high toll, including wounding General Walther Nehring, commander of the Afrika Korps. Despite these difficulties, the Germans were able to clear the minefields by noon the next day and began pressing east. Eager to make up lost time and under constant harassing attacks from 7th Armoured, Rommel ordered his troops to turn north earlier than planned. This maneuver directed the assault against the 22nd Armoured Brigades positions on Alam Halfa Ridge. Moving north, the Germans were met with intense fire from the British and were halted. A flank attack against the British left was stopped by heavy fire from anti-tank guns. Stymied and short on fuel, General Gustav von Vaerst, now leading the Afrika Korps, pulled back for the night. Attacked through the night by British aircraft, German operations on September 1 were limited as 15th Panzer had a dawn attack checked by the 8th Armoured Brigade and Rommel began moving Italian troops into the southern front. Under constant air attack during the night and into the morning hours of September 2, Rommel realized that the offensive had failed and decided to withdraw west. His situation was made more desperate when a column of British armored cars badly mauled one of his supply convoys near Qaret el Himeimat. Realizing his adversarys intentions, Montgomery began formulating plans for counterattacks with the 7th Armoured and 2nd New Zealand. In both cases, he emphasized that neither division should incur losses that would preclude them from taking part in a future offensive. While a major push from 7th Armoured never developed, the New Zealanders attacked south at 10:30 PM on September 3. While the veteran 5th New Zealand Brigade had success against the defending Italians, an assault by the green 132nd Brigade collapsed due to confusion and fierce enemy resistance. Not believing a further attack would succeed, Montgomery cancelled further offensive operations the next day. As a result, the German and Italian troops were able to retreat back to their lines, though under frequent air attack. The Battles Aftermath The victory at Alam Halfa cost Montgomery 1,750 killed, wounded, and missing as well as 68 tanks and 67 aircraft. Axis losses totaled around 2,900 killed, wounded, and missing along with 49 tanks, 36 aircraft, 60 guns, and 400 transport vehicles. Often overshadowed by the First and Second Battles of El Alamein, Alam Halfa represented the last significant offensive launched by Rommel in North Africa. Far from his bases and with his supply lines crumbling, Rommel was forced to move to the defensive as British strength in Egypt grew. In the wake of the battle, Montgomery was criticized for not pressing harder to cut off and destroy the Afrika Korps when it was isolated on his southern flank. He responded by stating that Eighth Army was still in the process of reforming and lacked the logistical network to support the exploitation of such a victory. Also, he was adamant that he wished to preserve British strength for a planned offensive rather than risk it in counterattacks against Rommels defenses. Having shown restraint at Alam Halfa, Montgomery moved to the attack in October when he opened the Second Battle of El Alamein. Sources Defensive Military Structures in Action: Historical ExamplesBBC: Peoples War - Battle of Alam Halfa