An experimental abstinence-only program without a moralistic tone can delay teens from having sex, a provocative study found.
Billed as the first rigorous research to show long-term success with an abstinence-only approach, the study differed from traditional programs that have lost federal and state support in recent years. The classes didn't preach saving sex until marriage or disparage condom use.
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (2)
In the discussion over the effectiveness of it should be mentioned that in January of 2008, Tyra Banks released the results of a study she sponsored that showed 20% of sexually active girls over the age of 12 are TRYING to get pregnant. They don't care what all the studies show, they want their own child and believe that since they are "almost adults", it's their right. Abstinence programs may not be effective, but programs teaching birth control only teaches them how to avoid it. Plus, with the growth in the sales of Self Insemination Kits, the girls can learn how to take a used condom, or after oral sex, and attempt to impregnate themselves. As such, this whole issue surrounding the increase in teen pregnancies goes well beyond any argument over Sex Ed classes in school.
You can divide teens roughly into three groups:
- Those who will stay abstinent regardless of what you teach in Sex Ed
- Those who will have sex regardless of what you teach in Sex Ed
- Those who will be influenced by what you teach in Sex Ed
Group 1 won't need abstinence education.
Group 2 will ignore abstinence education.
Group 3 may benefit from the decision-making skills taught in abstinence education.
If we consider teen sex to be, on balance, a bad idea, then it's a disservice to groups 1 and 3 to fail to teach abstinence.
Group 2 may benefit from information about "safe sex", but as you point out, some of them may not follow even that advice.
- 2 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |



