The Instigator
Con (against)
2 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Sex education in primary schools

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/7/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,786 times Debate No: 37471
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




This round is for acceptance only. Thank you in advancement to whoever accepts.
There are rules my opponent and me must follow.

1) No swearing
2) No insulting
3) Always conduct yourself politely.
4) No forfeiting rounds if it can be help it - I want a debate.

Round 4 - You will not produce any new arguments, it will be a closing round where you summarize your points and a closing statement to convince the voters.

Primary school - The teaching of young pupils from the ages of 4 - 10.
Sex education - Sex education is a broad term used to describe education about human sexual anatomy, sexual reproduction and sexual intercourse.

Thank you and good luck!


I accept the challenge, just for gettin started in this page, since im new here.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting. Also, I am relatively new to this site as well so don't worry! :)

I'd like to start of by saying that most people defend sex education by saying that it reduces the rate of teenage pregnancies. I can produces evidence that this is not the case. It in fact INCREASES teenage pregnancies!

A report called 'Sex education or indoctrination?' has said that teenage pregnancies has risen faster in areas where the government has targeted resources to reduce teenage pregnancies. The report is done by the Family Education Trust, which is an independent think tank. According to government statistics Cornwall, saw a 17 per cent rise in teenage pregnancies.
Figures have also shown that teenage pregnancy rose by 40% in some parts of London.
Teenage pregnancy rates are also the highest in Western Europe, despite this being a million pound scheme.

My point being is that the main point of sex education is to obviously reduce teenage pregnancy. This has proven in effective. Also, we have spend millions on this scheme and it obviously is not working, so it would be illogical to carry on with this when it is clearly making the matter worse and adding fuel to the fire.

I don't think the method of throwing condoms and the pill at teenagers is a very effective way of tackling the problem of teenage pregnancies. This seems to be giving the impression to teenagers that sex is okay, and to do it more! But at the end of the day you cannot expect teenagers to stop having sexual intercourse.
The author of the report, Valerie Riches, a former social worker, said: "The Government's teenage pregnancy strategy is based on the premise that it is unrealistic to expect young people to abstain from sex."

Also, with the increase in sexual intercourse, there is the inevitable chance of the increase in STI's/ STD's. There has been a 62% increase in the number of sexually transmitted diseases. Which is also a massive health risk.





I look forward to the next round!


Oh boy, im excited right now :P. I don't have good skill in debating, but well, here i goes:

The evidence that Con gives shows a relation between Sexual Education and Premature Pregnacies. Its undeniable that the Pregnacies rates have increased, but it can be showed that Sexual Education is not the cause:

Most of the teen pregnacies are unintented, but this can be explained by:

A) Contraceptive not working: In some cases, contraception is used, but proves to be inadequate. Usually, unintented pregnacies are related to contraceptive method choice: In 2002, more than half of contraceptive users relied on methods with high failure rates under typical use: 31% used the pill, 18% the male condom and 5% the 3-month injectable.5 While with perfect use these methods are highly effective, 9% of pill users, 17% of condom users and 5% of injectable users will become pregnant during the first year of typical use. To make matters worse, about half of condom and injectable contraception users " and almost one-third of pill users " will discontinue within a year.[1] ; [2] ; [3]

B)Inexperiences teenagers: Inexperienced adolescents may use condoms incorrectly, forget to take oral contraceptives, or fail to use the contraceptives they had previously chosen. This can be concieved due to the lack of understanding of how to use a contraceptive, or yet they don't use them. Why they don't use them can be grounded in the social scheme (social pressure; Prejudices; etc)

"I don't think the method of throwing condoms and the pill at teenagers is a very effective way of tackling the problem of teenage pregnancies."
Im agree with that point, i don't think that putting condoms on the market should fix everything, i think that explaining how the contraceptive works, how to use it and other things "may" do the job. [see A) and B)]




Well, that's the 2nd round here. Forgive my english.
Debate Round No. 2


It is a exciting having a debate... that's why I love this site lol

Flaws in pro's case:

[1] No method contraception is 100% reliable. However, male condoms are 98% effective, whilst female condoms are 95% effective. The contraceptive pill is 99% reliable. Contraceptive implants are 99% reliable. You could also use a condom and the pill together whilst having sexual intercourse, which makes it twice more reliable. Considering that contraception is so reliable. It is very unlikely that the 40% rise (and in areas where sex education has been specifically targeted) is to do with contraception being so unreliable.

[2] Pro also states that another reason could be down to inexperienced teenagers. The whole point of sex education is to teach teenagers how to put a condom on. So, if more teenagers are struggling to put condoms on, that shows sex education is not doing it's job right and it is ineffective. Pro has shown this. Also, there are other methods of contraception, there isn't just a condom.

I don't believe these two reasons is for the dramatic increase in teenage pregnancies in the last few years.

Here are more of my points:

[1] Sex education is also not right for the children ages. The images are so graphic for young children, and things are far too much. For example, 5-year-olds get taught about erections, masturbation, orgasms and prostitution. I'd hardly call that education children about contraception. In a nutshell it is teaching them how to do sex. They also tell 5-year-olds how their parents have sex. It is all in this article:
It is too much too young. This sort of material is not suitable for 5-year-olds.

[2] The UK also lacks the teachers with training to provide a good sex education lesson. The teachers who tend to teach the subject are ones that come from all sorts of subjects. And who are not specially trained in teaching sex education. Which also puts UK pupils at a disadvantage.

[3] The UK should learn from other countries when it comes to sex education. Did you know that teenage pregnancies in Holland is one-fifth as high as the UK. The way they teach sex education is different to how it is taught in Britain.
In the Netherlands, sex education is brought to pupils in the form of a relationship and not in the form of a biology lesson.
If we took lessons from countries with a lower teenage pregnancy rate than here, we may see an improvement in this country.

[4] Also, I can understand teaching pupils how to use contraception. But why is it necessary to teach children how to actually have sex. It is a natural thing. Humans have been doing it for thousands of years. Why do we suddenly need to get taught how to have sex. I'm in agreement with teaching pupils how to use contraception and (like the Netherlands) relationship advice. But, like the link I posted above, why that sort of content?





Thank you and I look forward to the next round!


Well, here i goes:

Given the con's answer about my arguments, and given that i cannot find more evidence to support them, i consider that my arguments have been refuted.

My case failed in favor to Con's case, since i don't find evidence to refute con's arguments/support my arguments.

That's the 3rd round here. I guess i lost :\
Debate Round No. 3


Thank you for not forfeiting the round though! I appreciate that! :)

I'm not going to do a closing statement or sum up any of my points further, as I don't think it is needed.

I hope you have enjoyed the debate though! :) Thank you!


Thanks you, interesting topic though.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by sweetbreeze 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Con used more sources.