“Comprehensive” Sex Education is
Ineffective: Abstinence Works, Major National Study Shows
By
Elizabeth O’Brien
SALT LAKE
CITY, Utah, June 13, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A major report on teen sex
education, released by Dr. Stan Weed of the Institute for Research and
Evaluation in Salt Lake City, shows why abstinence is the most successful
method of preventing physical and emotional complications resulting from
pre-marital sexual activity. His research is based on the results of many
studies that have followed the education and behavior of over 400,000
adolescents in 30 different states for 15 years (see http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007_docs/CompSexEd.pdf).
The final
report, entitled “Abstinence” or “Comprehensive” Sex Education? begins by
pointing out the flaws in a national study on abstinence released by
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Conducted in April 2007, this previous study
examined the progress of teens who participated in four different abstinence
education programs. The final report indicated that abstinence education was
ineffective and that young adolescents should receive “comprehensive” sex
education, that is, sex-education that teaches about various sexual behaviors
and “safe-sex” methods.
After
examining the Mathematica study’s methods, the Institute found several major
errors that made the study non-representative of American sex education. First,
says the more recent study, it took sample teens from “high-risk” sectors of
the population, such as poor African or American single-parent households.
During the study, young people received abstinence education in
pre-adolescence, but then received no follow-up training during adolescence.
They were also examined about their sexual activity several years after any
learning might have taken effect.
Dr. Stan Weed told LifeSiteNews.com: “Within the
Outlining
these limitations and the report’s inaccuracies, Dr. Weed highlighted the
problems that sexually active teens encounter and the failure of
“comprehensive” sex education to remedy such issues. These include teen
pregnancy, STD’s and poor emotional health. Sexually active young people are
also more often physically assaulted or raped.
“Comprehensive”
sex education also fails to explain the limitation of condoms, said the recent
study, pointing out that “many consequences of teen sexual activity are not
prevented by condom use.” Condoms are never a total guarantee against STD’s,
and so there is no kind of truly “safe” sex outside of marriage. Secondly,
despite 20 years of sex education, young people even fail to use condoms
consistently. Most importantly, however, condoms do nothing to prevent the
heartbreak, depression and low self-esteem caused by sexual activity.
The Utah
Institute researchers also investigated previous major studies on
“comprehensive” sex education and found that these programs had little impact
on the behavior of teens during their education and no long-term effects
whatsoever. In fact, “of 50 rigorous studies spanning the past 15 years, only
one of them reports an improvement in consistent condom use after a period of
at least one year.”
When
evaluating abstinence programs, the Institute investigated both high-risk and
moderate-risk students in programs such as Reasons of the Heart, Heritage
Keepers, Sex Respect and Teen Aid. Students in these programs were far less
likely to be sexually active and those who were reduced their sexual activity
by a large percentage. In the Reasons of the Heart study, for example,
researchers found that “adolescent program participants were approximately one
half as likely as the matched comparison group to initiate sexual activity
after one year. The program’s effect was as strong for the African American
subgroup in the sample as it was overall.”
The most
successful abstinence programs were those that emphasized the risk of
pre-marital sexual activity. They showed how abstinence fully protects a young
person from STD’s, teen pregnancy and emotional trauma. They underlined the
importance of self-control and responsibility and gave students the positive
goal of a stable and committed marriage towards which to work in future. At the
same time, however, researchers also found that it was crucial to re-educate
adolescents about abstinence each successive year.
Dr. Weed
concludes, “Well-designed and well-implemented abstinence education programs
can reduce teen sexual activity by as much as one half for periods of one to
two years, substantially increasing the number of adolescents who avoid the
full range of problems related to teen sexual activity. Abandoning this
strategy…would appear to be a policy driven by politics rather than by a desire
to protect American teens.”
These
results are consistent with many other findings, including a 2005 study by
Medical Issues Analyst Reginald Finger of Focus on the Family. He investigated
over 7,000 people in the United States that indicated the many social and
emotional benefits to remaining abstinent. (see http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/may/05050607.html).
READ THE
ORIGINAL STUDY:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007_docs/CompSexEd.pdf
By John
Jalsevac
WASHINGTON,
D.C., April 23, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Abstinence education is "crucial
to the physical and psycho-emotional well-being of the nation's youth,"
concludes a detailed report released by the Heritage Foundation.
The report,
"Abstinence Education: Assessing the Evidence", released
yesterday, examines 21 studies of abstinence education programs, and concludes
that statistics show that abstinence programs are effective in deterring teens
from becoming sexually active, thereby reducing the risk of STDs, teen
prengnacy, etc. The release of the report preceded today's hearing of the U.S.
House of Representative's Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, which discussed the efficacy of abstinence-only programs and
whether or not funding for such programs should be extended.
Abstinence-only
programs have received $1.3 billion in government funding over the last decade.
Such programs, however, have come heavily under attack from social liberals,
who argue that they put young people at risk by not giving a more
"comprehensive" view of sexual health issues - that is, by not
emphasizing enough contraception, abortion, and so-called "safe-sex."
They have also been accused of promoting "gender stereotypes" and of
being intolerant towards homosexuals.
The
chairman of the house committee, Rep. Henry A. Waxman, in his opening remarks
today argued that abstinence-only programs are ineffective, and do not merit
continued funding.
"I
respect the commitment and intentions of people who run abstinence-only
programs. They are doing it because they care about youth and want to counter
the sexual messages that are all too pervasive in popular culture," he
said. "But we will hear today from multiple experts that after more than a
decade of huge government spending, the weight of the evidence doesn't
demonstrate abstinence only programs to be effective."
The
Heritage Foundation report, authored by Christin C. Kim and Robert Rector,
however, disagrees, and demonstrates that a majority of abstinence programs
have reported a statistically significant decrease in levels of sexual activity
for students who participate in them.
Of 15
sex-ed programs that primarily taught abstinence, 11 reported positive
findings, while of 6 "virginity pledge" programs, 5 reported
positive findings.
One
abstinence program, Reasons of the Heart, reported that only 9.2 percent of
virgins who went through the program were sexually active a year later, compared
with 16.4 percent of those virginal teens who didn't go through the program.
Another
program, called Heritage Keepers, reported, "One year after the program,
14.5 percent of Heritage Keepers students had become sexually active compared
with 26.5 percent of the comparison group," making students from the
abstinence program about half as likely to become sexually active as those not
in the program.
A third
program, Best Friends, found that "Best Friends girls were nearly 6.5
times more likely to abstain from sexual activity" than those not in the
program. It was also found out, "They were 2.4 times more likely to
abstain from smoking, 8.1 times more likely to abstain from illegal drug use,
and 1.9 times more likely to abstain from alcohol."
Abstinence
programs, observes the report, are admirable in that they are not only about
sexual behavior, but "also provide youths with valuable life and
decision-making skills that lay the foundation for personal responsibility and
developing healthy relationships and marriages later in life."
The report
complains that while an enormous amount of effort is being put into teaching
"comprehensive" sexual education, very little effort is put into
teaching abstinence. "Today's young people face strong peer pressure to engage
in risky behavior and must navigate media and popular culture that endorse and
even glamorize permissiveness and casual sex," write Kim and Rector. "Alarmingly,
the government implicitly supports these messages by spending over $1 billion
each year promoting contraception and safe-sex education - 12 times what it
spends on abstinence education."
"Although
80 percent of parents want schools to teach youths to abstain from sexual
activity until they are in a committed adult romantic relationship nearing
marriage - the core message of abstinence education - these parental values are
rarely communicated in the classroom."
Instead,
says the report, "In the classroom, the prevailing mentality often
condones teen sexual activity as long as youths use contraceptives. Abstinence
is usually mentioned only in passing, if at all."
The
Heritage Foundation's report concludes urging that, "When considering
federal funding for abstinence education programs and reauthorization of Title
V abstinence education programs, including maintaining the current definition
of 'abstinence education,' lawmakers should consider all of the available
empirical evidence."
To read the
Heritage Foundation report, see:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm1897...