Content area
This practice brief explores integrating comprehensive sex education within Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) programs to address health disparities and promote well-being among community college students. By leveraging the strengths of FCS, this brief highlights the potential for a holistic approach to sex education that encompasses physical, emotional, and social dimensions of health. It offers recommendations for educators, policymakers, and community partners to enhance sexual health education through FCS, fostering a supportive environment that empowers students with the knowledge and skills necessary for informed decision-making. The implications of this approach extend to promoting public health, social equity, and economic prosperity across communities. Recommendations for prioritizing curriculum development, faculty training, and collaboration with community partners are presented within this practice brief.
This practice brief explores integrating comprehensive sex education within Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) programs to address health disparities and promote well-being among community college students. By leveraging the strengths of FCS, this brief highlights the potential for a holistic approach to sex education that encompasses physical, emotional, and social dimensions of health. It offers recommendations for educators, policymakers, and community partners to enhance sexual health education through FCS, fostering a supportive environment that empowers students with the knowledge and skills necessary for informed decision-making. The implications of this approach extend to promoting public health, social equity, and economic prosperity across communities. Recommendations for prioritizing curriculum development, faculty training, and collaboration with community partners are presented within this practice brief.
Keywords: Comprehensive sex education; Family and Consumer Sciences; health disparities; health literacy; reproductive health
Significance
In Arkansas, disparities in healthcare access, health outcomes, and health literacy are particularly pronounced in rural and underserved communities (Arkansas Department of Health, 2020; Mumford et al., 2020). Contributing factors such as race, income level, lack of health insurance, and social determinants of health exacerbate these disparities (County Health Rankings & Roadmaps, 2021; U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2023). Arkansas's restrictive abortion policies further compound these challenges, limiting access to reproductive healthcare services and comprehensive sex education (CSE; Guttmacher Institute, 2024). These inequities and restrictions are more than just issues in Arkansas. They also exist in states with substantial, underrepresented rural populations. As a representative of the early childhood community, I am a staunch advocate for the health and wellness of children and families. Based on the writings of Pop-Eleches (2006) in an article entitled "The Impact of an Abortion Ban on Socioeconomic Outcomes of Children: Evidence from Romania," history has informed us about the impact of restrictive abortion practices. Research indicates that restrictive abortion policies can result in higher rates of unplanned, mistimed, or unwanted pregnancies. Specifically, these policies can prevent women from delaying childbearing to a more suitable time and may lead to insufficient or delayed prenatal care due to the unwanted nature of the pregnancy (Angrist & Evans, 2012). This practice brief explores the potential benefits of integrating CSE within Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) programs in Arkansas's community colleges and other states where needed to address these challenges and improve well-being among young adults.
Purpose and Scope
This practice brief is to advocate for the integration of CSE into FCS programs in community colleges, addressing the critical need for comprehensive health education. By leveraging the holistic approach of FCS, which encompasses nutrition, parenting, financial literacy, and interpersonal relationships, community colleges can provide students with a well-rounded understanding of sexual health. This approach aims to reduce health disparities, improve health literacy, and foster informed decision-making among students which contributes to healthier and more equitable communities.
Integrating Comprehensive Sex Education into Family and Consumer Sciences
Integrating CSE into FCS curricula offer a holistic approach to sexual health education. By synthesizing the goals of CSE and FCS, educators can address the complex interplay of social, emotional, and physical factors that influence individuals' sexual health and relationships. This integrated approach promotes positive health behaviors within broader family and community dynamics. By equipping individuals with accurate information, practical skills, and supportive resources, CSE through FCS can empower individuals to make informed decisions and lead healthy, fulfilling lives.
Integrating CSE and FCS also offers a comprehensive strategy to sexual health awareness by attending to each person's specific needs within the broader context of family and personal well-being. Educational institutions can equip students with the necessary knowledge and skills to make informed decisions and lead healthy, satisfying lives by placing a high priority on curriculum development, faculty training, and collaboration with community partners.
Literature Review
CSE and FCS represent two distinct yet intersecting fields with shared goals of promoting well-being, healthy relationships, and informed decision-making. This literature review explores existing research on both CSE and FCS, highlighting their significance in addressing sexual health and broader aspects of personal and family dynamics.
The programs within CSE aim to provide individuals with accurate information and skills related to human sexuality, reproductive health, and relationships. Research indicates that CSE can lead to improved knowledge about sexual health, increased contraceptive use, and lower rates of sexually transmitted infections (Eisenberg et al., 2008). Moreover, CSE has been shown to empower individuals to make informed decisions about their sexual health and relationships, contributing to positive health outcomes (Liang et al., 2019). However, challenges such as limited funding, lack of institutional support, and cultural sensitivity may hinder the implementation of CSE programs in educational settings.
FCS programs encompass a wide range of topics related to family dynamics, personal health, nutrition, and financial literacy. These programs aim to equip individuals with practical skills and knowledge to navigate various life stages and transitions successfully. Research suggests that FCS education can promote healthy lifestyles, effective communication, and positive family relationships (University of Arkansas Extension, 2021). By addressing both individual and interpersonal aspects of well-being, FCS programs play a crucial role in promoting holistic health and resilience.
Some studies have specifically examined the integration of CSE into FCS programs, demonstrating promising outcomes. For instance, a survey by Kohler et al. (2008) found that students who received CSE, which was integrated into broader curricula, including FCS, were significantly less likely to report teen pregnancies compared to those who received abstinence-only education. This study underscored the potential of CSE to improve sexual health outcomes when delivered through comprehensive educational programs. Research by Frost et al. (2012) emphasized the importance of comprehensive approaches to sex education, noting that programs integrating multiple aspects of personal and social development tend to yield better health outcomes. By leveraging the holistic framework of FCS, educational institutions can address the diverse needs of students, fostering environments that support healthy decision-making and overall well-being.
Kirby (2007) supported the effectiveness of CSE programs. Kirby's meta-analysis of sex education programs found that those which incorporated a broader educational context, such as FCS, were more successful in delaying the initiation of sexual activity, reducing the number of sexual partners, and increasing contraceptive use among adolescents. These findings suggested that integrating CSE into FCS not only addresses sexual health directly but also positively influences a broader array of health and behavioral outcomes.
Moreover, the intersection of CSE and FCS is particularly relevant in addressing health disparities in underserved communities. For instance, research by Schalet et al. (2014) highlighted how culturally tailored CSE programs within broader educational frameworks can mitigate health disparities among minority youth. This is particularly pertinent in rural and underserved areas, such as those in Arkansas, where comprehensive and culturally sensitive approaches are essential for overcoming barriers to sexual health education. By integrating CSE into FCS, educators can ensure that sexual health education is more accessible and relevant to diverse student populations to promote health equity.
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework for enhancing CSE through FCS draws upon established theories and concepts from public health, education, and sociology to provide a comprehensive understanding of the complex factors influencing sexual health outcomes. One foundational theory informing this framework is the Social Determinants of Health (SDH) model, which recognizes that various social, economic, and environmental factors significantly influence health outcomes (Marmot & Allen, 2020). In the context of sexual health education, SDH theory underscores the importance of addressing structural inequalities such as poverty, lack of access to healthcare, and limited educational opportunities, which disproportionately affect individuals' ability to access accurate information and make informed decisions about their sexual health (Braveman & Gottlieb, 2014).
Building upon the SDH model, the Health Belief Model (HBM) offers insights into individuals' perceptions and behaviors related to health (Braveman & Gottlieb, 2014). According to HBM, individuals' decisions to engage in health-promoting behaviors such as seeking sexual health education or accessing reproductive healthcare services, are influenced by their perceived susceptibility to health risks, perceived severity of health consequences, and perceived benefits and barriers to action (Carpenter, 2010). In the context of CSE, this framework suggests that interventions should aim to increase individuals' perceived benefits of obtaining sexual health information while addressing perceived barriers such as stigma, cultural norms, and lack of knowledge.
Furthermore, the Ecological Systems Theory (EST) provides a holistic framework for understanding the multifaceted influences on individuals' health behaviors within their social environments (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). EST posits that individuals are nested within multiple interconnected systems, including the microsystem (individual), mesosystem (interactions with peers and family), exosystem (community and institutional factors), and macrosystem (cultural and societal norms). By taking a systems-level approach, interventions can target multiple levels of influence to create supportive environments that facilitate positive health behaviors.
Synthesizing these theoretical perspectives, the theoretical framework for enhancing CSE through FCS emphasizes the need for comprehensive, multilevel interventions that address social determinants, individual beliefs, and institutional contexts. By integrating these theories into program development and implementation, educators can create inclusive, empowering environments that promote health equity and support students' sexual and reproductive health needs.
Implications/Recommendations
Integrating CSE into FCS programs hold significant promise for promoting holistic sexual health education. To effectively implement this integration, several implications and recommendations emerge. Firstly, curriculum development should prioritize the incorporation of CSE topics into existing FCS courses, ensuring that content is age-appropriate, evidence-based, and culturally sensitive (Hall et al., 2015). This integration can be achieved through the development of modules or units within FCS courses that address key aspects of sexual health, including anatomy, reproductive health, contraception, healthy relationships, and communication skills. Additionally, FCS educators should be provided with professional development opportunities to enhance their capacity to deliver effective sex education programming, including training on evidence-based teaching methods, cultural competency, and addressing sensitive topics (Schneider & Hirsch, 2020).
Community partnerships can provide valuable resources, guest speakers, and experiential learning opportunities for students to foster a deeper understanding of sexual health within the broader context of community well-being. Additionally, partnerships with local health departments can facilitate access to sexual health services including contraception, testing for sexually transmitted infections, and reproductive healthcare referrals, thereby addressing the comprehensive needs of students beyond the classroom setting (Frost et al., 2012).
Moreover, student support services within educational institutions play a crucial role in promoting sexual health and well-being. FCS programs should collaborate with campus health centers to provide comprehensive sexual health resources and support services to students including confidential counseling, peer education programs, and access to reproductive healthcare services (University of Arkansas Extension, 2021). Peer education programs can empower students to become advocates for sexual health promotion within their communities, facilitating open and honest conversations about sensitive topics, and reducing stigma surrounding sexual health issues (Schneider & Hirsch, 2020).
Conclusion
Integrating CSE into FCS programs offers a multifaceted approach to addressing the complex needs of individuals within the broader context of family and personal well-being. By synthesizing the goals of CSE and FCS, educators can empower individuals with the knowledge and skills needed to make informed decisions and lead healthy, fulfilling lives. Research indicates that CSE promotes positive sexual health outcomes, including reduced rates of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (Kirby, 2007; Kohler et al., 2008). Similarly, FCS programs have been shown to equip individuals with practical skills and knowledge to navigate family and personal dynamics successfully (University of Arkansas Extension, 2021). By integrating CSE topics into existing FCS courses, educators can provide students with a holistic understanding of human sexuality and relationships to address both individual and interpersonal aspects of sexual health. Collaboration with community organizations, healthcare providers, and other stakeholders is crucial to enriching curriculum content and ensuring its relevance to students' lives. By embracing this comprehensive approach, educators can foster a supportive environment where individuals feel empowered to make informed decisions about their sexual health and relationships, ultimately contributing to their overall well-being and the health of their communities.
Correspondence regarding this article should be directed to Crystal DeVon Branch, Adult and Lifelong Learning, University of Arkansas, 620 E Coffee Way Fayetteville, AR 72701. Email: [email protected] / (479) 900-7300
References
Angrist, J. D., & Evans, W. N. (2012). Introduction to "schooling and labor market quences of the state abortion reform." In S. W. Polachek & K. Tatsiramos (Eds.), 35th Anniversary Retrospective (Vol. 35, pp. 137-139). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S01479121(2012)0000035008
Arkansas Department of Health. (2020). State health assessment report. https://www. healthy.arkansas.gov/programs-services/topics/state-health-assessment-book
Braveman, P., & Gottlieb, L. (2014). The social determinants of health: It's time to consider the causes of the causes. Public Health Reports, 129(1), 19-31.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
Carpenter, C. J. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of health belief model variables in predicting behavior. Health Communication, 25(8), 661-669.
County Health Rankings & Roadmaps. (2021). Key findings: Rankings data € documentation. https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/ explore-health-rankings/rankings-data-documentation
Eisenberg, M. E., Bernat, D. H., Bearinger, L. H., & Resnick, M. D. (2008). Support for comprehensive sexuality education: Perspectives from parents of school-age youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 42(4), 352-359. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.019
Frost, J. J., Lindberg, L. D., & Finer, L. B. (2012). Young adults' contraceptive knowledge, norms, and attitudes: Associations with risk of unintended pregnancy. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 44(2), 107-116.
Guttmacher Institute. (2024). Interactive map: US abortion policies and access after Roe. https://states.guttmacher.org/policies/arkansas/abortion-policies
Hall, W. J., Chapman, M. V., Lee, K. M., Merino, Y. M., Thomas, T. W., Payne, B. K., Eng, E., Day, S. H., & Coyne-Beasley, T. (2015). Implicit racial/ethnic bias among health care professionals and its influence on health care outcomes: A systematic review. American Journal of Public Health (1971), 105(12), e60-e76. https://doi.org/10.2105/ ajph.2015.302903
Kirby, D. (2007). Emerging answers 2007: Research findings on programs to reduce teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.
Kohler, P. K., Manhart, L. E., & Lafferty, W. E. (2008). Abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education and the initiation of sexual activity and teen pregnancy. Journal of Adolescent Health, 42(4), 344-351.
Liang, M., Simelane, S., Fillo, G., Chalasani, S., Weny, K., Caneles, P., & Phumaphi, J. (2019). The state of adolescent sexual and reproductive health. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(6), 661-669.
Marmot, M., & Allen, J. (2020). Social determinants of health equity. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S1), 64-55.
Mumford, Q., Miller, W., Wheeler, E., & Christenberry, P. (2020). Primary care needs assessment of Arkansas. https://www.healthy. arkansas.gov/images/uploads/pdf/Office_of_ Rural_Health_and_Primary_Care_Primary_Care_Needs_Assessment.pdf
Pop-Eleches, C. (2006). The impact of an abortion ban on socioeconomic outcomes of children: Evidence from Romania. Journal of Political Economy, 114(4), 744-773.
Schalet, A. T., Santelli, J. S., Russell, ©. T., Halpern, C. T., Miller, S. A., Pickering, S. S., Goldberg, S. K., & Hoenig, J. M. (2014). Invited commentary: Broadening the evidence for adolescent sexual and reproductive health and education in the United States. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(10), 1595-1610.
Schneider, M., & Hirsch, J. S. (2020). Comprehensive sexuality education as a primary prevention strategy for sexual violence perpetration. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 21(3), 439-455. https://doi. org/10.1177/1524838018772855
University of Arkansas Extension. (2021). What is family and consumer sciences? Extension Publication, 45(3), 12-20. https://www.uaex. uada.edu/life-skills-wellness/what-is-fcs.aspx
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023). Socioeconomic factors. https://Www. cdc.gov/dhdsp/health_equity/socioeconomic. htm
Copyright Montezuma Publishing 2025