Abstinence education not so successful
Filed under: Teens, Your Pregnancy, Health & Safety: Babies, Day Care & Education
A few years back, we were at an outdoor concert with a dear friend of ours. He and his son had been at the Pride Parade that morning and he had pocketfuls of condoms that had been given out at the parade. He started passing them out to other concertgoers, most of whom, it seemed, had come straight from Sunday church -- it was a Gospel concert. One man, there with his fifteen-year-old son, tried to decline, saying he had talked to his son and the boy was going to save himself for marriage. At that point, my friend said "You'd better take two; he'll need them." Turns out, my friend was right.Apparently, getting kids to say and even promise that they won't have sex doesn't mean they won't. According to a new study, mandated by congress, kids who took part in sexual abstinence programs were just as likely to be sexually active as kids who didn't. Not only that, they ended up having the same number of sexual partners as those who didn't attend the abstinence classes and they had sex for the first time at approximately the same age -- fourteen years, nine months, on average.
Officials in the Bush administration are cautioning people not to pay any attention to the man behind the curtain, saying that the students were some of the first to take part in abstinence-until-marriage education. Our government now spends $176 million dollars a year on such programs. There are those, myself included, who feel strongly that the money would be better spent on a more realistic and more comprehensive sexual education program, one which certainly would cover abstinence as an option but which would also cover the full range of sexual information.
"Members of Congress need to listen to what the evidence tells us," said William Smith, vice president for public policy at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. "This report should give a clear signal to members of Congress that the program should be changed to support programs that work, or it should end when it expires at the end of June." I agree. If we're going to spend that kind of money on Sex Ed, let's do it in a way that actually makes a difference.
Regardless of what the government does, however, I think we should all heed the very sage advice of one ParentDish reader who wrote recently, "I think the bigger mistake would be to assume the school's sex ed program means parents don't have to talk to their kids about sex. For some, because the school is 'too conservative.' For others, because it is too liberal. Same goes for drugs and driving and anything else that can cause huge problems if your kids don't make healthy choices. Folks, this is your responsibility. Take it seriously." I don't think I could have said it better.
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
- Here in dc since dec, 6 2006 retired FED BOARD GOV,inventor ,writter, FORMER GOVERNOR (founder of the republic of )DERIAN DOUGLAS HICKMAN
- Why did you lie and tell the world that, "The Left Behind Video game kills Jews and Atheists"?
- Using a foreign governement company to defend UNITED STATES OF AMERICA alot of .gov huh











ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
4-14-2007 @ 5:28PM
Jeannie said...Roger, your argument is aking to saying that since "just say no" lessons don't work, we should be teaching kids how to snort/swallow/shoot up safely, instead of instructing kids to be drugs/alcohol free.
Reply
4-14-2007 @ 5:29PM
Jeannie said...*akin not aking
Reply
4-14-2007 @ 6:00PM
Adam Chance said...@ 1
That assumes we have a strong, STRONG, STRONG biological urge to "snort/swallow/shoot up"
No comparison.
Reply
4-14-2007 @ 7:30PM
Eva said...Holy crap, the average age they start having sex now is FOURTEEN? Dear lord preserve us.
Reply
4-14-2007 @ 9:53PM
Trisha said...Just because there is a "strong, STRONG, STRONG biological urge" dosen't justify having sex. There has recently been a strong movement/support to ban smoking from all kid/teen movies because of the belief that it influences them to smoke themselves. I was surrprised that there was such a push for smoking while practically nobody bats an eye at SEX in movies/TV for teenagers. Is it because smoking is PROVEN to bad for your body and there's nothing that solid against pre-marital, early, casual sex? I think sex is a wonderful thing- in marriage. Call me old fashioned and crazy but that's what I believe. I (and my husband) abstained until marriage and it's not that I'm a crazy religious zealot or something. I was raised to believe it's morally wrong to have pre-marital sex and I believe it. I believe in God and I believe that's what he wants. ANYWAY......back to the point.
We live in a seriously amoral society, not the average family but the media has sends some seriously scary messages about sex to kids. How can people expect their children to abstain from sex if they probably didn't, they don't bother to weed out some of the sex from what their children watch and then be SHOCKED when their teenager has sex, even after attending an "abstinance program." (Seriously- isnt' that the parent's job in the first place?)
The problem of sexually active teenagers participating in unsafe sex has more to do with our society's acceptance of it than anything else. Abstinance programs are like wiping at the surface of a deep rooted disease and hoping it will go away.
I just wish I could have said all that a little better.
Reply
4-16-2007 @ 2:19PM
Jessica said...There HAS to be another condom picture out there. This one has been used a trillion times on this site. UGH.
Reply