Skip to main content
Guttmacher Institute

Search

  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Data, Videos & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • 2024 Impact Report

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
Guttmacher Institute
Donate

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Data, Videos & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • 2024 Impact Report

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact
Journal of Adolescent Health

Adolescents' Receipt of Sex Education in a Nationally Representative Sample, 2011–2019

Authors

Laura D. Lindberg, Rutgers School of Public Health Leslie M. Kantor, Rutgers University

Purpose
Updated estimates of adolescents' receipt of sex education are needed to monitor trends and potential inequities.

Methods
Using nationally representative data from the 2011–2015 and 2015–2019 National Survey of Family Growth, we use logistic regression to examine changes in the receipt of formal sex education by gender. For 2015–2019, we estimate patterns by gender and race/ethnicity for content, timing, and location of instruction.

Results
Between 2011–2015 and 2015–2019, there were few significant changes in adolescents' receipt of formal sex education. Between these periods, instruction on waiting until marriage to have sex declined (73%–67% female [F.], p = .005; 70%–58% males [M.], p < .001). In both the periods, about half of the adolescents received sex education that meets the minimum standard articulated in national goals. In 2015–2019, there were significant gender differences in the instruction about waiting until marriage to have sex (67% F., 58% M., p < 001) and condom skills (55% F., 60% M., p = .003). Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic males were less likely than non-Hispanic White males to receive formal instruction before the first sex on sexually transmitted infection/HIV, birth control, or where to get birth control. Many adolescents reported religious settings as the sources of instruction about waiting until marriage to have sex (56% F. and 49% M.), but almost none received instruction about birth control from those settings.

Conclusions
Differences in the receipt of sex education, by gender, race/ethnicity, and the location of instruction, leave many adolescents without critical information. Gaps in meeting national objectives indicate the need to expand the provision of sex education.

First published on Journal of Adolescent Health: November 4, 2021

DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2021.08.027
Source / Available for Purchase
Full article available in the Journal of Adolescent Health

Share

Topic

United States

  • Teens

Geography

  • Northern America: United States

Tags

sex education
Guttmacher Institute

Center facts. Shape policy.
Advance sexual and reproductive rights.

Donate Now
Newsletter Signup  Contact Us 
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Footer

  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility Statement
© 2025 Guttmacher Institute. The Guttmacher Institute is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the tax identification number 13-2890727. Contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowable.