Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Häufige urologisch-sexualmedizinische Themen in der Praxis sind das Thema des MMW-Webinars am 5. Juni von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. Konkret geht es um die Frage, wann bei Harnwegsinfektionen auf Antibiotika verzichtet werden kann, und um ein Update zur Therapie von Libido- und Potenzstörungen des Mannes. Der dritte Vortrag behandelt sexuell übertragbare Krankheiten. Stellen Sie Ihre Fragen an die Experten und sammeln Sie 2 CME-Punkte. Jetzt gleich anmelden!
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Current Sexual Health Reports
Erschienen in: Current Sexual Health Reports 3/2023

08.05.2023

Sex Education for LGBTQ+ Adolescents

verfasst von: Ceili Charley, Annika Tureson, Linzie Wildenauer, Kristen Mark

Erschienen in: Current Sexual Health Reports | Ausgabe 3/2023

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This paper summarizes the current research on the impact of abstinence-only sex education programs on LGBTQ+ adolescent health in the USA. We also seek to explore the current barriers to implementing comprehensive sex education, as well as discuss the future of LGBTQ+ adolescent health by outlining crucial components of LGBTQ+-inclusive sex education.

Recent Findings

The US sex education debate is centered on two approaches: abstinence-only and comprehensive. Abstinence-only sex education emphasizes risk reduction through abstaining from sexual behavior and has been found to be ineffective in promoting healthy sexual behavior among adolescents, compared to comprehensive sex education which centers on disseminating inclusive and medically accurate information. Abstinence-only sex education is taught through a heteronormative framework that excludes and devalues the experiences of LGBTQ+ adolescents. LGBTQ+ individuals are at increased risk for negative health outcomes as compared to their cisgender heterosexual counterparts. Lack of knowledge regarding safe sexual practices and consent, coupled with the shame and fear-based messaging promoted by abstinence-only sex education, further contributes to the health disparities experienced by LGBTQ+ youth.

Summary

The content and inclusivity of sex education has important implications for the health of LGBTQ+ youth. Abstinence-only sex education further compounds the health disparities experienced by LGBTQ+ adolescents by erasing LGBTQ+ representation and leaving out crucial information on diverse, non-heterosexual sex practices. Numerous barriers exist to implementing comprehensive, inclusive sex education including funding, policies, teacher training, and attitudes toward sex and LGBTQ+ individuals. To address these health disparities, we must listen to and amplify the voices of LGBTQ+ youth to promote safe, comprehensive, and LGBTQ+-inclusive content within our sex education system in the USA.
Literatur
1.
Huber VJ, Firmin MW. A history of sex education in the United States since 1900. Int J Educ Reform. 2014;23:25–51.CrossRef
2.
3.
Bodnar K, Tornello SL. Does sex education help everyone?: sex education exposure and timing as predictors of sexual health among lesbian, bisexual and heterosexual young women. J Educ Psychological Consult. 2019;29(1):8–26.CrossRef
4.
Bruener CC, Mattson G. Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health. Sexuality education for children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2016;138:e1–e11.
5.
Kramer AS. Framing the debate: the status of US sex education policy and the dual narratives of abstinence-only versus comprehensive sex education policy. Am J Sex Educ. 2019;14:490–513.
6.
Kirby D. Emerging answers 2007: research findings on programs to reduce teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy; 2007.
7.
Santelli J, Grilo SA, Lindberg LD, Speizer I, Schalet A, Heitel J, et al. Abstinence-only-until-marriage policies and programs: an updated position paper of the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. J Adolesc Health. 2017;61:400–3.PubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
Santelli JS, Kantor LM, Grilo SA, Heck CJ, Rogers J, Ott MA, et al. Abstinence-only-until-marriage: an updated review of U.S. policies and programs and their impact. J Adolesc Health. 2017;61:273–80.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Trenholm C, Devaney B, Fortson K, Quay K, Wheeler J, Clark M. Impacts of four Title V, Section 510 abstinence education programs. Final report. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.; 2007.
10.
Kohler PK, Manhart LE, Lafferty WE. Abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education and the initiation of sexual activity and teen pregnancy. J Adolesc Health. 2008;42:344–51.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Rasberry CN, Condron DS, Lesesne CA, Adkins SH, Sheremenko G, Kroupa E. Associations between sexual risk-related behaviors and school-based education on HIV and condom use for adolescent sexual minority males and their non-sexual-minority peers. LGBT Health. 2017;5:69–77.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Rasberry CN, Lowry R, Johns M, Robin L, Dunville R, Pampati S, et al. Sexual risk behavior differences among sexual minority high school students - United States, 2015 and 2017. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67:1007–11.CrossRef
13.
Kann L, Olsen EO, McManus T, Harris WA, Shanklin SL, Flint KH, et al. Sexual identity, sex of sexual contacts, and health-related behaviors among students in grades 9-12 - United States and selected sites, 2015. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2016;65:1–202.PubMed
14.
Kann L, McManus T, Harris WA, Shanklin SL, Flint KH, Queen B, et al. Youth risk behavior surveillance — United States, 2017. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018;67:1–114.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
Heels SW. The impact of abstinence-only sex education programs in the United States on adolescent sexual outcomes. Perspectives. 2019;11:3.
16.
Hoefer SE, Hoefer R. Worth the wait? The consequences of abstinence-only sex education for marginalized students. Am J Sex Educ. 2017;12:257–76.
17.
Naser SC, Clonan-Roy K, Fuller KA, Goncy EA, Wolf N. Exploring the experiences and responses of LGBTQ+ adolescents to school based sexual education. Pyschol Sch. 2022;59:34–50.CrossRef
18.
Kosciw JG, Greytak EA, Zongrone AD, Clark CM, Truong NL. The 2017 National School Climate Survey: the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth in our nation’s schools. New York: GLSEN; 2018.
19.
Evans R, Widman L, Goldey K. The role of adolescent sex education in sexual satisfaction among LGB+ and heterosexual young adults. Am J Sex Educ. 2020;15:310–35.
20.
Estes ML. “If there’s one benefit, you’re not going to get pregnant”: the sexual miseducation of gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals. Sex Roles. 2017;77:615–27.CrossRef
21.
Hobaica S, Kwon P. “This is how you hetero:” sexual minorities in heteronormative sex education. Am J Sex Educ. 2017;12(4):423–50.
22.
Hobaica S, Schofield K, Kwon P. “Here’s your anatomy…good luck”: transgender individuals in cisnormative sex education. Am J Sex Educ. 2019;14:358–87.
23.
Ozata B, Yuksel S, Noyan H, Avayu M, Yildizhan E. EPA-0185 - effects of sex reassignment surgery on quality of life and mental health in transsexuals. Eur Psychiatry. 2014;29:1–1.CrossRef
24.
Heer B, Brown M, Cheney J. Sexual consent and communication among the sexual minoritized: the role of heteronormative sex education, trauma, and dual identities. Fem Criminol. 2021;16:701–21.CrossRef
25.
26.
Keller L. Adolescents deserve better: what the Biden-Harris administration and congress can do to bolster young people’s sexual and reproductive health. Guttmacher Pol Rev. 2021;24:8–13.
27.
Proulx CN, Coulter RWS, Egan JE, Matthews DD, Mair C. Associations of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning–inclusive sex education with mental health outcomes and school-based victimization in U.S. high school students. J Adolesc Health. 2019;64:609–14.CrossRef
28.
Mata D, Korpak AK, Sorensen BL, Dodge B, Mustanski B, Feinstein BA. A mixed methods study of sexuality education experiences and preferences among bisexual, pansexual, and queer (bi+) male youth. Sex Res Soc Policy. 2022;19:806–21.CrossRef
29.
Crowell C. Anti-gay sex education: a lasting tool for discrimination? Law Sex. 2019;28:45–57.
30.
Epps B, Markowski M, Cleaver K. A rapid review and narrative synthesis of the consequences of non-inclusive sex education in UK schools on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning young people. J Sch Nurs. 2021:10598405211043394.
31.
Kanuga M, Rosenfeld WD. Adolescent sexuality and the internet: the good, the bad, and the URL. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2004;17:117–24.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Kaczkowski W, Cooper AC, Li J, Robin L. The association of LGBTQ-supportive school health policies and practices with sexual health outcomes. LGBT Health. 2022;9:384–92.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
33.
Sondag KA, Johnson AG, Parrish ME. School sex education: teachers’ and young adults’ perceptions of relevance for LGBT students. J LGBT Youth. 2020;19:247–67.CrossRef
34.
Donovan MK. The looming threat to sex education: a resurgence of federal funding for abstinence-only programs? Guttmacher Pol Rev. 2017;20:44–7.
35.
36.
Feldman Farb A, Margolis AL. The teen pregnancy prevention program (2010–2015): synthesis of impact findings. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:S9–S15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Fox AM, Himmelstein G, Khalid H, Howell EA. Funding for abstinence-only education and adolescent pregnancy prevention: does state ideology affect outcomes? Am J Public Health. 2019;109:497–504.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
38.
39.
Kantor LM, Santelli JS, Teilte J, Balmer R. Abstinence-only policies and programs: an overview. Sex Res Soc Pol. 2008;5:6–17.CrossRef
40.
Hammig B, Ogletree R, Wycoff-Horn MR. The relationship between professional preparation and class structure on health instruction in the secondary classroom. J Sch Health. 2011;81:513–9.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Price JH, Dake JA, Kirchofer G, Telljohann SK. Elementary school teachers’ techniques of responding to student questions regarding sexuality issues. J Sch Health. 2003;73:9–14.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Rhodes DL, Kirchofer G, Hammig BJ, Ogletree RJ. Influence of professional preparation and class structure on sexuality topics taught in middle and high schools. J Sch Health. 2013;83:343–9.PubMedCrossRef
43.
44.
Kennedy C, Covell K. Violating the rights of the child through inadequate sexual health education. Int J Child Rights. 2009;17:143–54.CrossRef
45.
Boushka B. Homosexuality should be discussed in high schools. In: Wells KR, editor. Teenage sexuality: opposing viewpoints. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press; 2006. p. 183–92.
46.
Feinstein B, Thomann M, Coventry R, Macapagal K, Mustanski B, Newcomb M. Gay and bisexual adolescent boys’ perspectives on parent-adolescent relationships and parenting practices related to teen sex and dating. Arch Sex Behav. 2018;47:1825–37.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Mustanski B, Greene G, Ryan D, Whitton S. Feasibility, acceptability, and initial efficacy of an online sexual health promotion program for LGBT youth: the Queer Sex Ed intervention. J Sex Res. 2015;52:220–30.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Atkins DN, Bradford WD. The effect of state-level sex education policies on youth sexual behaviors. Arch Sex Behav. 2021;50:2321–33.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Roffman DM. A model of helping schools address policy options regarding gay and lesbian youth. J Sex Educ Ther. 2000;25:130–5.CrossRef
50.
Haley SG, Tordoff DM, Kantor AZ, Crouch JM, Ahrens KR. Sex education for transgender and non-binary youth: previous experiences and recommended content. J Sex Med. 2019;16:1834–48.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Olson-Kennedy J, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Kreukels BP, Meyer-Bahlburg HF, Garofalo R, Meyer W, et al. Research priorities for gender nonconforming/transgender youth: gender identity development and biopsychosocial outcomes. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabet Obes. 2016;23:172–9.CrossRef
52.
Rabbitte M. Sex education in school, are gender and sexual minority youth included?: a decade in review. Am J Sex Educ. 2020;15:530–42.PubMedPubMedCentral
53.
Minnesota Student Survey Interagency Team. Minnesota Student Survey 2019, 2022. Roseville, MN: Minnesota Department of Education, 2019, 2022.
54.
Herbenick, D. Sex, love, intimacy, and orgasm: integrating Sex Ed and new findings from the National Survey of Sexual Health Behavior. Presented at: National Sex Ed Conference; December 5, 2014; New Jersey.
55.
56.
Bradford NJ, DeWitt J, Decker J, Berg DR, Spencer KG, Ross MW. Sex education and transgender youth: ‘trust means material by and for queer and trans people’. Sex Educ. 2019;19:84–98.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Sex Education for LGBTQ+ Adolescents
verfasst von
Ceili Charley
Annika Tureson
Linzie Wildenauer
Kristen Mark
Publikationsdatum
08.05.2023
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Current Sexual Health Reports / Ausgabe 3/2023
Print ISSN: 1548-3584
Elektronische ISSN: 1548-3592
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-023-00361-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2023

Current Sexual Health Reports 3/2023 Zur Ausgabe

ReviewPaper

Sexual Dysfunction Related to Ketamine Use: a Systematic Review

ReviewPaper

Persistent Genital Arousal Disorder/Genitopelvic Dysesthesia: Review of the Current State of the Treatment Literature and Future Directions in Treatment

ReviewPaper

Older LGBTQ Adults and Sexual Health

ReviewPaper

Postpartum Sexual Function and Depression: a Review of Recent Literature

ReviewPaper

Bisexuality and Substance Use

ReviewPaper

Women’s Orgasm and Its Relationship with Sexual Satisfaction and Well-being

Neu im Fachgebiet Urologie

Patrone im Penis bringt Urologen in Gefahr

30.05.2024 Operationen am Penis Nachrichten

In Lebensgefahr brachte ein junger Mann nicht nur sich selbst, sondern auch das urologische Team, das ihm zu Hilfe kam: Er hatte sich zur Selbstbefriedigung eine scharfe Patrone in die Harnröhre gesteckt.

15% bedauern gewählte Blasenkrebs-Therapie

29.05.2024 Urothelkarzinom Nachrichten

Ob Patienten und Patientinnen mit neu diagnostiziertem Blasenkrebs ein Jahr später Bedauern über die Therapieentscheidung empfinden, wird einer Studie aus England zufolge von der Radikalität und dem Erfolg des Eingriffs beeinflusst.

Costims – das nächste heiße Ding in der Krebstherapie?

28.05.2024 Onkologische Immuntherapie Nachrichten

„Kalte“ Tumoren werden heiß – CD28-kostimulatorische Antikörper sollen dies ermöglichen. Am besten könnten diese in Kombination mit BiTEs und Checkpointhemmern wirken. Erste klinische Studien laufen bereits.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise