The Illusion of Sex-Ed as Panacea: Addressing Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health Disparities in Minnesota

Abstract

Although many praise Minnesota for its strong healthcare system, the state still faces significant disparities in access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services and comprehensive sexuality education (CSE). These disparities in access are compounded by geographic location, socioeconomic status (SES), and race, with barriers across transportation, cost, and clinic availability further complicating these issues. Based on this understanding, this paper examines adolescent SRH disparities between the Twin Cities metropolitan area and northern rural regions in Minnesota, focusing specifically on unintended adolescent pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Building on this foundation, I apply Dr. Vanessa Voller’s “CSE-as-panacea” framework, which extends Dr. Frances Vavrus’s “education-as-panacea” theory, to highlight how CSE is positioned as the sole solution to complex structural SRH disparities.1, 2 Framing sexual health education as a universal fix neglects the broader social determinants of health (SDOH), depoliticizes systemic disparities, and shifts responsibility from governmental structures onto individual adolescents. By employing narratives of individual youth empowerment, governmental and institutional systems obscure structural inequities while placing the burden of prevention and health improvement entirely on young people without providing any meaningful support. This effectively maintains and perpetuates the same global power structures that not only created these health disparities but continue to entrench and exacerbate them. Based on this, I advocate for an intersectional, multilayered approach in addressing adolescent SRH disparities that pairs affordable, community-based, culturally relevant, and trauma-informed accessible care, with evidence-based, scientifically grounded, developmentally appropriate, and high-quality CSE. A central part of this work is a youth-centered approach, which means listening to and trusting young people as experts on their own health and bodies, while providing them with the knowledge, skills, and safe, judgment-free environments they need to advocate for themselves. 1. Vanessa K. Voller, “Comprehensive for Whom? Examining the Politics, Promises, and Paradox of School-Based Comprehensive Sexuality Education in a Rural Community in Eastern Bolivia” (PhD Dissertation, 2025), 70, https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/comprehensive-whom-examining-politics-promises/docview/3253342843/se-2?accountid=12205. 2. Frances Vavrus, “Constructing Consensus: The Feminist Modern and the Reconstruction of Gender,” Current Issues in Comparative Education 5, no. 1 (January 1, 2002): 53, https://doi.org/10.52214/cice.v5i1.11364