Bush pushes abstinence-only education
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 02-13-2004 - 6:58pm |
Now, I agree that abstinence is the only 100% effective way of avoiding unwanted pregnancies & STDs - however, it's also not realistic to expect everyone to abstain outside of marriage. It's never happened and it never will. Young people need to be given real information about the risks and about ALL the options. To deny knowledge is a crime.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apwashington_story.asp?category=1151&slug=Sexual%20Abstinence
Friday, February 13, 2004 · Last updated 11:25 a.m. PT
Bush pushes abstinence-only education
By MARK SHERMAN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration is proposing to double spending on sexual abstinence programs that bar any discussion of birth control or condoms to prevent pregnancy or AIDS despite a lack of evidence that such programs work.
A study by researchers at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on declining birth and pregnancy rates among teenagers concludes that prevention programs should emphasize abstinence and contraception.
"Both are important," said Dr. John Santelli, the lead author of the study, which has not been published.
In Minnesota, a study found that sexual activity doubled among junior high school students taking part in an abstinence-only program. The independent study, commissioned by the state's health department, recommended broadening the program to include more information about contraception.
Independent researchers who are studying abstinence-only programs for the federal government said in their first report two years ago that no reliable evidence exists whether the programs work. They are expected to issue an update soon.
In his State of the Union address, President Bush said, "We will double federal funding for abstinence programs, so schools can teach this fact of life: Abstinence for young people is the only certain way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases."
Bush would spend $270 million on abstinence-only education, compared with $100 million annually when he took office.
The president also would move the programs into the same agency within the Health and Human Services Department that oversees religious-based programs and the president's proposal to promote marriage.
Advocates of comprehensive sex education said the shift, coupled with the additional money, is part of Bush's election-year appeal to conservatives.
They said the administration's proposal flies in the face of research that credits both abstinence and contraception with reducing the teenage birth rate by 30 percent in the past decade to historic lows.
"This is money, hundreds of millions of dollars that we could better spend on children and people who need the help," Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., told HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson at a hearing on the president's budget proposal.
James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth, a group that promotes education about birth control and condom use, said abstinence-only programs deprive teenagers of information about the effectiveness of condoms in stopping the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. "These programs have really evolved into anti-condom programs," Wagoner said.
Yet supporters of the abstinence programs said teens should be hearing more about refraining from sex.
"Kids in society are saturated with information about contraception and messages about encouraging casual, permissive sex," said Robert Rector, who helped write the administration's abstinence education program.
Rector discounted the Minnesota study as unscientific and said the CDC research does not give enough credit to abstinence.
The comprehensive sex education promoted by Advocates for Youth and other groups focuses on safe sex, not abstinence, said Rector, a senior researcher at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative-leaning think tank. Wagoner rejected the assertion and pointed to his group's Web site, which praises abstinence.
"Abstinence is the only 100 percent effective method for avoiding unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections, including HIV," the site says.
cl-nwtreehugger
Co-cl: In The News http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/listsf.asp?webtag=iv-elinthenews&nav=start
Community Leader - Sports Talk http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/listsf.asp?webtag=iv-elsportstalk&nav=start

Pages
The more I know about a subject, the more likely I am to make a good decision where it's concerned. If I know my car must have an oil change every 3,000 miles or I risk expensive damage to the motor, you can be sure I'm going to get that oil changed on time because I don't want trouble. If I know I can get a sexually transmitted disease or get pregnant by having unprotected sex, and those consequences are illustrated to me in living color, odds are I'll act much more responsibly than if I don't know much about those things and don't know what can happen if I engage in sex.
It seems that today, all teens would know that having sex can result in a pregnancy and/or STD, given the availability of information. But there is so much inaccurate information floating around (if he pulls out, you won't get pregnant/ if it's your first time, you can't get pregnant / if you do it the week after your period you can't get pregnant / if he wears a rubber you can't get pregnant) that it's vital to have good, solid sex education to dispel all the myths floating around.
I heard all these myths in school but I was lucky enough to have a relative who was a nurse, and who filled me in on anything I wanted to know about sex. I had a good, solid knowledge of sex by the time I was fourteen, and you'd be surprised - maybe not - by all the girls who actually argued with me when I told them what they were saying wasn't really true. Condoms break, you can't always count on not getting pregnant the week after your period, you CAN get pregnant the first time, and so forth. I know one girl who got pregnant at 15 and she was one of the ones who had disputed me the year before, when we were in 7th grade, when I'd told her you can still get pregnant even if he pulls out before the big moment.
We didn't have official sex ed classes when I was that age; the school nurse came into the girls' locker room for the menstruation discussion and film. In biology we discussed reproduction but didn't get into any birth control discussions - we were just there to learn how conception took place. I was lucky that I had a reliable source of information and sad that so many other kids didn't.
I read a very, very troubling article several months ago whereby a survey was taken. I don't remember all the numbers, but an alarmingly large number of teenage boys felt it was acceptable under 'certain' circumstances to force a girl to make out/have sex if she didn't do it willingly. I do recall one of those circumstances was if they'd spent a lot of money - i.e., prom, gifts, etc. (Shudder) Educating these boys might - just might - change that attitude.
We could educate all those young kids out there with all the reliable information they need to know about sex, birth control and disease, but those with a specific agenda continue to try to quash those initiatives because the 'idea' of giving kids that information seems wrong to them, and would lead to more kids having sex. Bunch of bull****.
Well, the idea of teen sex doesn't please me either, but we can't continue to let our kids live in the dark and just deal with the consequences if something happens - pregnancy, disease, rape. I don't want my teenage daughter having sex either, but I know that I can't control my kids' every move. I can't be with them 24 hours a day, and they must at some point take responsibility for themselves if they're going to be responsible adults. I'll give her all the information she needs; educate her and her siblings on all aspects of sex, disease, birth control and respecting each other, and hope that they will make the right decisions when faced with a choice.
Since clearly I can't depend on the school to teach them what they need to know, I will take it upon myself to get the solid information and relay it to my kids.
Sure - abstinence is the only method that is 100% effective against unintended pregnancy and STDs. It doesn't mean all kids are going to abstain, and unfortunately there are millions of kids who are still going to have sex every year. It doesn't make them criminals or bad people - they're young human beings who are going through serious growing pains and are learning about themselves. I remember the strong temptations to have sex when I was a teenager, and how hard it was to resist. Some kids will indulge, some won't. Educate them all and hopefully those who do engage in sex will protect themselves properly. It's not ideal but it's what we have. Perhaps Bush feels that if they're only taught abstinence, that's all they'll practice - even though everything points to the contrary.
I only teach my kids to tell the truth, but they don't always do that. I never taught them to lie, but sometimes they do. Preaching abstinence only isn't a guarantee kids won't experiment with sex, even if you didn't tell them anything about sex. They will pick it up elsewhere, and might pick up inaccurate information that they might believe.
Abstinence-only "sex ed" is akin to playing Russian roulette with our kids' health, lives and futures. Tell them what they need to know and prepare them for the tough choices they will face. Hopefully they will say no until they're married ( or at least old enough to handle a sexual relationship) but if they don't, maybe they'll use the information we gave them and protect themselves.
This is a hot topic for me, obviously. Once I get going it's hard for me to stop complaining about it. '0) Thanks if you got this far.
I read your entire post and agree with you.
Pages