The session opened with Douglas Kirby providing statistics that youth make up 40% of all new adult HIV infections while less than 40% have basic information on HIV. He also debunked the most common myth about sexuality education by showing through research in a variety of countries in both the developed and developing world that a good number of sexuality programs reduce at risk behavior in young people. Kambazi Susan Dorcus from PSI presented the positive findings of a study aimed at assessing the effect of a 3 day camp focused on building self esteem and enhancing negotiation skills for pre-university young women.  The camp was started to reduce the incidence of cross generational sex which is an important cause of HIV in young Ugandan women.
Kim Miller from the CDC also spoke on how a sexuality program they have designed for Sub Saharan Africa which will involve parents and caretakers by helping them to understand their unique role as caregivers and enhance their communication skills so they can get across to their children. The program is based on the theory that it is easier to prevent high risk behavior than to change already established habits.
John  Montoya’s evaluation of the Columbian Pilot project on sexuality education in a country with 50% of its population in poverty, 20% of school aged children not in school and 15% unemployment rates emphasized that for us to have an education that actually recognizes the sexual rights of young people, “the State must be capable of totally guaranteeing their human rights”.
Hector Perez’s assessment of the “preventing through education” scheme also in Latin America and the Caribbean noted certain obstacles including finance and the influence of religion and ultra conservativeness of the state on sexuality issues. Of 17 countries who agreed to participate, only 10 researched the needs of the youth and children, with 18% of their ministries of health offering access to condoms only for youth leaving a wide gap where children and adolescents are concerned.
At the end of the discussion, some of the questions raised and answered on the variety of programs discussed revealed that though many of the programs were tested on small groups of youth most did not actually have sufficient youth consultation in the development of the curricula. Accepting sex as pleasurable is a major barrier with most governments to implementing comprehensive programs, and majority of the programs had huge gaps in reaching out to children, adolescents and the population of young people not receiving formal education. The impact of many of the programs have also not been measured for long durations but comparative studies have established that didactic programs of very short durations without enough follow up were bound not to significantly affect attitudes of young people. After differing opinions on whether peer health education was better than caregiver provided sexuality education it was established that it is of foremost importance that sexuality education should involve the youth themselves in its development and should use a variety of methods, including parents, peers, religious organizations to provide that accurate information and support needed to reduce at risk behavior in young people.
 

Onikepe Oluwadamilola OWOLABI