Something to ponder about from manila bulletin
LETS TALK ABOUT SEX
By RONALD S. LIM
In a Catholic country such as ours, the topic of sex either draws titters of nervous laughter, or scandalized glares. No middle ground seems to exist. You are either an overly promiscuous, ill-mannered and uneducated lout, or an ultra-conservative, convent-bred spinster whose mindset has remained firmly entrenched in 1611 Philippines.
Recently, Pampanga prelate and Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines-Episcopal Commission on Family and Life (CBCP-ECFL) chairman Archbishop Paciano Aniceto assailed the Department of Education (DepEd) for its attempt to "quietly smuggle" sex education into various high school subjects under the ??name?? of adolescent reproductive health and reproductive rights.
This was then followed by allegations by sex education expert Filipina Ra?ada that the DepEd had been planning to "fully institutionalize" sex education in the country through its modules for the current schoolyear.
The modules, according to Ra?ada, would have Grade 5 students bringing eggplants, cucumbers and bananas to school so they could be taught proper condom usage.
The resulting brouhaha this caused among conservative parents and pro-life groups eventually forced the DepEd to drop any plans of including sex education or reproductive health in its high school curriculum, thereby preserving the "moral and spiritual well-being" of the country?s youth, to quote Archbishop Aniceto.
On the other, those who are for sex education and reproductive health in schools say that it is needed now more than ever.
In its Young Adult Fertility Survey, the University of the Philippines? Population Institute revealed that in 2002, more than three million youths are engaging in premarital sex all over the country, a five percent increase from 1994.
More disturbing is the fact that a lot of these young people would not be able to distinguish between a condom and an intrauterine device.
In a study conducted last year by the Foundation for Adolescent Development, in coordination with the United Nations Population Fund, it was revealed that while more and more Filipino adolescents were engaging in premarital sex, a lot of them had a very distorted notion of what sexuality and reproductive health is about. Their knowledge of contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases were sketchy at best, and depressing at its worst.
A DOCTOR?S VIEWPOINT
In a predominantly Catholic Philippines, is it really possible to educate our youth about their reproductive health and their sexuality without running afoul of the Church?s teachings? Some people think it is possible, if the church would only try.
Connie (not her real name) is a gynecologist in a private Manila hospital and a very devout Catholic. During the course of her job, she has seen an increase in the number of teenage pregnancies, and has often expressed her frustration at what she views is the Church?s outdated stand on reproductive health.
"The Church doesn?t allow tubal ligations and yet I do it, because you can?t just let these children keep on having kids of their own. I?m committing a sin every time I do this, and every time I have to go to confession," Connie admits.
Reactions from priests who have heard her confession have ranged from those who have quietly advised her to keep this to herself, to those who have shouted and berated her for her actions.
Connie says she was born a Catholic and intends to die a Catholic but that she also intends to go on performing ligations. She can?t help but express a bit of frustration at the Church?s stand on sex education and reproductive health.
"The Catholic Church is too conservative, they can?t move on," she says. "Their views are no longer realistic. How can you tell somebody from the squatter?s area not to sleep together during the woman?s fertile period, when they?re all sleeping beside each other in crowded houses? Add to that the fact that a woman?s fertile periods are not always regular."
The moves by the Catholic Church not only draw the ire of pro-choice groups, she says, but also alienates it from the youth in its flock, most of whom no longer have a grasp of the basic tenets of the Church?s teachings anyway.
"My patients don?t follow and don?t believe the Church?s teachings," she says with resignation. "They attend Mass, they take communion, but these rituals have no meaning to them. How do you expect them to understand the Church?s view on sex?"
PROMOTING PROMISCUITY?
If you ask the Church and other Catholics, that?s something that the parents should be doing.
Thirty five-year old Fr. Roy Hedreyda Alipio is a priest at the Our Lady of Loreto Parish in the Bustillos area. He believes that in general sexuality and the topics pertaining to it should be taught by parents, who after all know their children better than any teacher would.
"Parents should be the ones to teach and expound on sexuality to their children," he says, "The school shouldn?t act as the main source of information, but rather as a supplement."
Jude Galford, 29 years old and a reporter for the Manila Bulletin, also believes that for children below 18, it is the parents who should teach their children or decide whether they want their kids to be exposed to such knowledge.
"If the parents want their children to be sex educated, there would be a clamor for it," he says. "There?s no clamor for it right now, so the best thing would be for the children to receive it at home."
Both don?t think that this is a sign of the Church being old-fashioned or being out of touch, but rather the Church just doing its job. Both are also doubtful about the DepEd?s capacity to properly instruct the Filipino youth regarding the sexuality and reproductive health.
"In what context are they teaching sex education anyway?" asks Fr. Alipio. "If we?re talking about teenage pregnancies, this is solely the responsibility of the parent and the person. If the root cause of this is the population explosion, and the government?s way of controlling the population, I don?t think that?s good either. Sexuality, and its responsibilities, should still be taught by the parents."
Galford even questions whether the Church had anything to do with the DepEd?s retraction of its sex education modules and materials in the first place.
"I think that the DepEd withdrew their materials not because of the church but simply because their material is crap," he asserts. "When it comes to things coming from the DepEd, I think it?s the right move to pull out their materials because I have no confidence in their materials."
Galford also says that it is not foolish to think that teaching sex education will promote promiscuity among the youth.
"There is an assumption with sex education that people will have sex. Why teach reading when people are not going to read? Why teach sex ed when people don?t want to have sex?" he says. "The context of sex according to the Church is that it should happen between man and wife. I came from the seminary, and that?s also my context for sex. In today?s context, the secular world believes that so long as the boyfriend and girlfriend want it, they should do it without regards to their age or their reasons for doing so. I think sex education will promote promiscuity because it will arouse their curiosity."
FINDING A COMPROMISE
Connie, Galford, and Fr. Alipio point to either the Church or State with not doing enough to properly arm today?s youth with the knowledge to tackle their future reproductive concerns.
"The assumption that the youth will have sex is true, but what the state is doing is tolerating this, telling the kids to have sex even if they are young," says Galford. "The Church says this is wrong because sex should be done in the context of marriage."
Connie says that waiting for marriage is something easier said than done, that it is a piece of advice that is woefully out of touch with today?s youth.
"I used to tell my patients the same thing, but they always tell me ?madaling sabihin, pero mahirap gawin,?" she says. "Today?s youth is much more aggressive. You tell them not to do something and they?ll go ahead and do it."
The three also have different ideas as to at what age and how our children should be taught about the facts of life. Galford believes that sex education should be an elective course in college, to be offered to students 18 years old and above.
"At 18, children already have the legal options, they can get married, and their minds are fully formed. They can make choices that 15 year olds aren?t necessarily equipped to make," he says. "Seeing as most of us are Catholics, the moral authority of the Church carries as long as the child is concerned. At 18, they are now legally equipped to make that choice for themselves."
Fr. Alipio says that the community should work with the parents to teach their children, and that the environment should be taken into consideration as to when this should be done.
"In Manila, because the children are exposed to many things, they have to be taught sexuality at a different age than those in the province," he says. "Community involvement is also important, in such a way that they do not highlight sexual deviations, such as abuse, but instead tackle it in a caring environment. The community has to monitor things like these so that there is a greater understanding of sexuality."
Connie says that rather than harp about the government?s handling of sex education, the Church should instead actively work with the DepEd to come up with a curriculum that teaches sex education without it having to run contrary to current Church teaching.
"It?s possible to have sex education classes without bringing up contraception, if the Church would only try," she asserts. "Rather than just blindly telling these children not to engage in sex, we should tell them why engaging in sex before marriage could be detrimental not only to them but to their babies and the community. Sex isn?t just about the act and the organs. You have to tell these kids what will happen to them when they get pregnant at a very young age when they?re lives are far from stable."
