While the Vancouver and Toronto public school boards consider putting condom vending machines in school washrooms and the Ottawa public board places birth control clinics on school premises, Montreal, the most cosmopolitan and sophisticated of all Canadian cities, has decided to tackle teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases in a whole new way with a program called PSI: Postponing Sexual Involvement.
PSI is a “How to Say No” program that was developed to help adolescents resist pressures to become sexually active. PSI does not simply present information but also gives teens the skills to recognize and resist pressure from peers, society and the media.
PSI has a basic premise: young teenagers should not be having sex. The target age is 13 to 15 year olds. No sex education is given, nor any contraceptive information. Thus while it could be combined with a sex education course (i.e. puberty and reproduction) it avoids the double message that trying to teach chastity and contraception sends.
The Montreal Council of Women (MCW) has test piloted the program in five Montreal area schools of various backgrounds. It was enthusiastically received by students, teachers and parents. Health and Welfare Canada provided MCW with funding for the project.
The MCW is to be commended. As they explain in their report to Health and welfare, they “carefully examined a number of programs aimed at reducing teenage sexual activity and determined that a program in use in public schools in Atlanta, Georgia, offered the most favourable combination of community acceptability, pedagogical soundness and practical results in terms of delayed sexual involvement among young teens. The program has been incorporated into the curriculum of the Atlanta public school system for over six years and has met with an outstanding rate of success.
“PSI was created by a team from the Teen Services Unit of Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, GA, headed by Dr. Marion Howard and Marie E. Mitchell, R.N.
“A significant feature of PSI is the use of teen leaders in the classroom (always with a trained PSI adult present). These are especially selected grade 11 or 12 students, a male and female for each class, who are trained to teach the course to the younger grade 8 students. Teens are much more likely to internalize a message like that of PSI when and identify with the person presenting the message.
PSI is modeled on the Stanford smoking prevention project in which peers are used to teach assertiveness techniques to help teens resist social and peer pressures. The results of this project indicated a reduction not only in the number of teens who began smoking, but also among those who experimented with alcohol and marijuana.
“Peer leaders go a long way in establishing the program’s validity in the eyes of the students. For what may be the first time, these young people hear each other expressing opinions like, ‘Having sex doesn’t make you grown-up’ and ‘If someone really cares for you they won’t pressure to do something you don’t want to do.”
Other special features of PSI include: * one clear message; no double talk; *information on why to say no to early sexual involvement; * help in recognizing peer and societal pressure and media manipulation; * refusal skills and assertiveness training useful in other contexts such as smoking, alcohol and drugs; * compact format: seven 50 minute lessons; * a follow-up session a month after the first six sessions to reinforce the skills learnt; * enjoyment oriented; encourages participation through skits and positive role-playing; * parents can take a companion course to help them reinforce what their children have learnt; * program has been well tested; * program has been strongly approved by students; * non-controversial, good community acceptance.
Not surprisingly parents are keen about PSI. But do students want such a course?
Before the program was introduced a questionnaire was prepared asking students anonymously what they would like more information on. Twenty topics were listed, only three of which were related to sexuality. Multiple selections were allowed. “How to get a part-time job” and “how to keep physically fit” were the most popular choices, but “building a good relationship with someone of the opposite sex” ranked third and “how to say ‘no’ without hurting my friends’ feelings” placed fifth overall. Of 1210 students from four Montreal schools (601 female and 609 male), ranging in age from 12 to16 years ,49 percent wanted to help with “building a good relationship with someone opposite sex,” 37 percent indicated an interest in “how say no with out hurting my friends’ feelings ”and 20 percent selected “how to avoid sex until I am older and still be liked. ’’
The evaluation question near after the program is even more encouraging. Of 94 Secondary II students (grade 8) who took the course, a resounding100 percent of females and 98 percent of males said they found extremely helpful, very helpful.
In case the Montreal sample seems a small one, the results in a much lager pilot project in Atlanta are also promising. Of 1,000 teens, 8 percent said they would recommended the series to a friend and 70 percent said PSI aught them that teens can postpone sex with out losing the respect of their friends. PSI was recommended by the U.S Department of Education in its 1987 booklet, ADIS and our children’s Education of Our Children: a Guide for Parents and Teachers.’’ In the first lesson students were asked to make 3 lists –1) why some young people become sexually involved; 2) why should young people wait; and 3 ) unexpected results of having sex. All 3 were discussed the middle lesson and straight –forward commentary:
“Some diseases that spread by having sex can’t be cured. Also more and more grown-ups are finding they can’t have a baby because of infections they got from having sex as teens.
“Some girls think that having sex makes them grown- up. They think that having sex will make them a ‘woman’. In our society, a lot of boys think they have to have sex to prove they are a ‘man’. They think it makes them ‘cool’ or macho. However, having sex has little to do with being grown-up Being grown-up means being able to develop and keep a long- lasting relationship.
“Even if teens use birth control, they are risking a pregnancy. No method of birth control is 100 percent effective. The only 100 percent effective method of birth control is saying “no”. Having a baby can reduce the changes of teens being able to do things that make them really grown up, such as finishing school, making enough money to support themselves and being free to choose their own style of life. Having sex with someone doesn’t “make you grown –up.”
There is no danger of information overload or losing the class in a maze of statistics. Certainly if the program was offered at a grade level higher than 8, this section would need beefing up.) Too often sex ed programs fall into the trap of clinically describing every sexual transmitted disease under the sun, and miss the psychological causes of teen sexuality, such as having sex to feel adult or to keep a boyfriend. PSI deals directly with these more personal issues:
“Lots of kids pressured into having sex thinking they will lose their boyfriend or girlfriend if they don’t. A lot of couples break up anyway. If having sex is what’s needed to hold a couple together, then it’s probably not a very good relationship.”
PSI never says when having sex is o.k. But it clearly says “Some try to make you believe if an unmarried man is having sex, he is more of man. That is not true.” A similar statement is made of the unmarried woman.
“You don’t have to relate sexuality to a person to share with them on very intimate levels”.
“Another pressure comes from the mistaken believe that people always have to be in a sexual relationship to enjoy life.” The truth is there are lots and lots of ways to enjoy life.”
Moral and religious conservatives will feel comfortable with the program. It doesn’t contradict or undermine anything they believe. Moreover, there is room for and recognition of moral and religious beliefs of reasons for postponing sexual involvement. At the same time, it does not insist that all the students must be motivated by such values. Plenty of health reasons for postponing sex are given too.
Nor is the program invasive of personal privacy. Discussion is kept general and the students are not put on the spot. They do not have to give their personal reasons for postponing or engaging in sex. No personal questions are asked. Students thus can rethink their sexual ethics without being singled out.
In PSI there are plenty of good reasons for young teens to postpone sexual involvement, and having established that in the first lesson, the next six concentrate on practical refusal skills. These skills could be useful at any age.
The National Council of Women (not to be confused with the Nation Action Council for the Status of Women) is now seeking funding from Health and Welfare Canada to Canadianize the program and translate PSI into French. A Montreal school for mildly intellectually handicapped eagerly sought after the program. Canadian modifications were made and it was highly successful in that setting too. Youth groups and summer camps have also approached MCW for the course. The Quebec Department of Education has also put PSI on the list of recommended Extras for the Protestant Schools. At least ten high schools in the Protestant School Board of Greater Montreal will be using PSI in 1989/90.
In the long run, Postponing Sexual Involvement and courses like it would be far more effective in preventing teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS, than condom vending machines. School boards across Canada should be seriously looking at this fine program.
