Help
Sign In
abstinence
November 2008 
Does Abstinence based education work?
Posted on Apr 21st, 2007
by 
Ryan
Ryan
A conservative (though intelligent and scrupulously honest) friend of mine points out a number of serious flaws in some of the coverage of various "abstinence-only" studies.
The only question is, 'is abstinence only education better than abstinence plus condoms'? And if so, under what circumstances? I don't claim to know the answer. My mind is open. But I'd suspect that areas with much higher rates of teen pregnancy would benefit more from abstinence plus condoms. Of course, the question there is; do some of the girls in high-teen-pregnancy areas actually want to get pregnant. I had one good friend who was trying to get pregant ever since she hit 18. If these girls want to get pregnant, talking about condoms will do no good at all.
link1
link2
STDs seem to be increasing, and viruses like CMV (transmitted via saliva) which were previously viewed as harmless have been shown to have lifelong effects in some cases. Teen pregnancy is rising. The prospects for a girl pregant in her teens can have intra-generational consequences. So these things are important.
If anyone has a reaction to either of these linked posts, I'd like to hear it.
- Some of the studies called "abstinence only" aren't really abstenince only
- Some note that 'rates of sexual activity doubled under abstinece only programs' when the 'doubling' is caused by the kids being studied aging from 13 to 15. So 15 year olds have sex more often than 13 year olds. Wow! Thanks for the helpful interpretation of the research, guys (and kids in surrounding areas not in the program still had higher rates of teen pregnancy)
- and some programs are very effective, but only on particular types of kids (high acheiving, two parent homes, for instance) whereas low acheiving kids seem to be less affected by any type of education. The high acheivers are lumped in with the low acheivers, and no significant result is found.
- The often repeated fear that abstinence only education will decrease condom use compared to no education at all seems totally unfounded.
The only question is, 'is abstinence only education better than abstinence plus condoms'? And if so, under what circumstances? I don't claim to know the answer. My mind is open. But I'd suspect that areas with much higher rates of teen pregnancy would benefit more from abstinence plus condoms. Of course, the question there is; do some of the girls in high-teen-pregnancy areas actually want to get pregnant. I had one good friend who was trying to get pregant ever since she hit 18. If these girls want to get pregnant, talking about condoms will do no good at all.
link1
link2
STDs seem to be increasing, and viruses like CMV (transmitted via saliva) which were previously viewed as harmless have been shown to have lifelong effects in some cases. Teen pregnancy is rising. The prospects for a girl pregant in her teens can have intra-generational consequences. So these things are important.
If anyone has a reaction to either of these linked posts, I'd like to hear it.
Access: PublicTagged with: Abstinence, abstinence based education, sex, love, STDs, pregnancy, teen pregnancy, conservatives, condoms, media bias, bias
