Is CARE Careless? • CARE's crisis pregnancy counselling • CARE's Quite a Catch • Letter to CARE • CARE's sex education • Non-directive counselling

CARE and Condoms

Dr ES Williams, FFPHM

Christian Action, Research and Education, commonly known as CARE, presents itself as a Christian organisation that stands for righteousness.  Its slogan is ‘Christian love in action’.  It is seen by many as a prophetic voice that speaks on moral issues for the evangelical wing of Christianity in the UK.  It is supported financially, and in prayer, by tens of thousands of sincere Christians.   

An important part of its ministry is teaching young people sex education.  According to Lyndon Bowring, writing in CARE’s newsletter, June 2004, CARE’s new Evaluate… informing choice programme encourages healthy sexual choices and the delaying of sexual activity.  ‘Promoting the message of “saved sex” rather than “safe sex” has been pilloried and laughed at.’      

So what does CARE teach about condoms?  To answer this question I have examined the document Education Policy, Aims & Code of Conduct which outlines CARE’s new Evaluate… informing choice sex education programme.  According to the policy document, Evaluate ‘is a Sex & Relationship Education programme which, using a set of dynamic, relevant and interactive multimedia presentations, empowers young people to make healthy informed choices, and supports them in delaying sexual experience until a committed relationship, ideally marriage’.  The programme is ‘delivered by teams of highly trained educators to pupils age 11 and over’.  CARE aims to assist ‘developing life skills to enable young people to make healthy and well-informed decisions’ regarding their sex life.  It claims that the content of the sex education presentations will lead to informed decisions-making.   

The document explains CARE’s position on condoms.  Quote:  ‘As the Evaluate programme provides education about choices available to people in the light of HIV & AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections, this will include education about condom use.  The Evaluate programme does not promote the exclusive use of condoms as the only choice for young people with regard to sexual behaviour.  Rather, Evaluate educators provide such education in accordance with the World Health Organisation position, which is “abstinence and fidelity between uninfected partners and safer sex can prevent the transmission of HIV.  Safer sex includes non-penetrative sex and sex using condoms.”  Evaluate educators do not give out condoms in schools nor are condom demonstrators part of these demonstrators.’    

A WHO position statement on Condoms and HIV Prevention (July 2004) asserts that ‘condoms are an integral and essential part of comprehensive prevention and care programmes, and their promotion must be accelerated… Condoms are a key component of combination prevention strategies individuals can choose at different times in their lives to reduce their risks of sexual exposure to HIV.  These include delay of sexual initiation, abstinence, being safer by being faithful to one’s partner when both partners are uninfected and consistently faithful, reducing the number of sexual partners, and correct and consistent use of condoms.’     

In Your School and Sex Education (1996) CARE reminds teachers that they ‘are recommended not to provide individual advice on contraception to those under 16 but there is nothing in the guidance or legislation to prevent teaching about contraception within the whole class situation… teachers can provide young people with information about where confidential advice can be obtained, and as this information is not regarded as sex education per se, it can be freely available to all students irrespective of parental wishes regarding sex education.  Doctors and school nurses may be free to give contraceptive advice to individual pupils if requested by the pupil to do so.  This is irrespective of parental wishes regarding sex education.’_[i]  Here CARE is simply reminding teachers of the Government’s policy on contraceptives for under-age children, without any guidance on whether it is consistent with biblical teaching on sexual behaviour.

 CARE’s response to the Government’s social exclusion unit makes clear its view that there is a role for centres which offer contraception to young people faced with the possibility of an unplanned pregnancy.  ‘When a young person visits a centre, communication and discussion with parents either directly or by encouraging the girl to speak to her parents, is seen as an important part of supporting the girl as she considers the options open to her.  In addition, young people’s advice centres and specifically dedicated family planning facilities can be effective especially if young people are given an opportunity to discuss their situation and decision-making as well as being provided with contraception, if appropriate.’_[ii]  CARE believes ‘that it is not appropriate to make contraception available to young people in the absence of discussion and advice, so casual distribution of condoms for example at youth clubs or schools is not acceptable.’_[iii]  However, CARE registers no objection to contraceptive clinics for young people, which provide advice on how to use contraception, such as those run by Brook and the NHS.         

 Note the following points:

1.       CARE’s message to children about condoms is based, not on Scripture, but on the advice of the World Health Organisation (WHO).  Moreover, the WHO position is fully supported by the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF).  In October 1999 the WHO met with a number of organisations, including the IPPF to produce a joint policy statement on dual protection against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.  The statement claimed that: ‘Informed choice must also include the acknowledgement that the condom, when used correctly and consistently, not only prevents HIV and STIs, but can also be a highly effective contraceptive.’      

2.       The WHO version of ‘safer sex’, which forms the basis of CARE’s policy on sex education, includes instruction in both non-penetrative sex and sex using condoms.  The reason for teaching children about non-penetrative sex (that is, oral sex, anal sex and mutual masturbation) is the belief that if children are taught the pleasures of non-penetrative sex they will be less likely to indulge in vaginal sex, thereby reducing the rates of teenage pregnancy.  The A Pause sex education programme of Exeter University is a keen exponent of non-penetrative sex.  According to the programme director, John Rees, it is about getting 14 and 15-year-olds to think about stages of intimacy that do not involve penetrative sex, with its risks of pregnancy and infection. _[iv]  He added: ‘It’s about saying to them. “You can hold hands, you can kiss and cuddle”, it may even get as far as something like oral sex or even mutual masturbation.’_[v]         

3.       CARE teaches children how to use condoms so that if they make an informed decision to have sex, they are able to practise ‘safer sex’, that is sex with condoms.  CARE’s seems to ignore the danger that teaching children about condoms for their possible use inevitably condones extramarital intercourse and is likely to inflame sexual lust.  Teaching children how to use condoms undoubtedly promotes or condones fornication.          

4.       CARE teaches children that condoms provide protection against HIV and sexually transmitted diseases.  Yet available epidemiological evidence ‘does not allow an accurate assessment of the degree of protection against gonorrhoea infection in women offered by the correct and consistent condom use’._[vi]

 The most disturbing aspect of CARE’s approach to sex education is that it is amoral.  There is no attempt to teach children that certain types of sexual behaviour are wrong. The concept of sexual purity, which lies at the heart of Christian teaching, is ignored.  The biblical virtues of modesty, chivalry and chastity are disregarded.  Children are simply presented with sexual facts, including facts on using condoms, and invited to make an informed decision about whether or not to have sex.  Those who choose to have sex are encouraged to use condoms.  It doesn’t take much to see that CARE’s amoral sex education is no different from that delivered by the Family Planning Association, Brook and the Government’s sexual health strategy.