Abstinence-only programs still don’t work

Where do I begin on the flaws associated with this “revolutionary” new abstinence-only sex education class and abstinence advocates embracing the validation towards it? While I commend University of Pennsylvania’s efforts and attempts at creating and analyzing different forms of sex education, it is clear their study offers no evidence for conservatives to embrace.

“Sex education classes that focus on encouraging children to remain abstinent can persuade a significant proportion to delay sexual activity, researchers reported Monday in a landmark study that could have major implications for U.S. efforts to protect young people against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.”

“This new study is game-changing. For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex.”
- Sarah Brown, National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy

No Ms. Brown, it is not.

The main blemish in their support is the fact that their new curriculum does not meet the Bush Administration’s federal guidelines for funding in abstinence-only sex education. The teachers did not discourage the use of condoms; they just did not mention them in the criteria. If a student asked about condom usage, the teachers answered in a true and honest answer.

Another noteworthy mention is that the kids in the abstinence-focused class eventually had sex within two years of the program. Considering abstinence-only faith-based classes stress the importance of remaining chaste until marriage, there is simply no reason why they can embrace this study as proof their methods worked. 33% of the kids started having sex around the ages of 14 to 15. The teenagers also used condoms when they became sexually active. I believe they practiced safe-sex because they were not told condoms are ineffective, and were taught the honest truth and facts when answered by their teachers.

“Several critics of an abstinence-only approach said that the curriculum tested did not represent most abstinence programs. It did not take a moralistic tone, as many abstinence programs do. Most notably, the sessions encouraged children to delay sex until they are ready, not necessarily until married; did not portray sex outside marriage as never appropriate; and did not disparage condoms.”

I hope the American public will realize the truth that came about in this study and realize that being honest and up-front with teenagers and sex is the best and most effective way to prevent pregnancy and STDs. We have to realize that kids are having sex right, and aside from locking them in a basement until they turn 18, there is no way to stop it. That being said, honesty and providing them with multiple contraceptive methods gets this job done.

And by the way, Ms. Brown, I find your organization’s goal on “improving the lives and future prospects of children and families and, in particular, to help ensure that children are born into stable, two-parent families who are committed to and ready for the demanding task of raising the next generation” ludicrous. I grew up in a stable four-parent household(s) where all of my parents were open and honest about sex and sexual-health since I was a small child. As a result, I’ve never had a pregnancy or STD scare. I feel like my parents prepared my sister and me, the “next generation,” much better than the good old two-parent Pallins did for little Bristol.

abstinence bullshit condoms education health sex-ed teen pregnancy planned parenthood study