teen abstinence campaign fails

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2008
teen abstinence campaign fails
14
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 2:11am
$1.5 billion teen sex abstinence campaign fails

CRISTINA PAGE


April 18, 2008 at 12:18PM AKST



http://thearcticsounder.com/news/story/2067


New research reveals that female students in programs that promote abstinence exclusively are more likely to get pregnant than those in programs that teach about the full range of contraceptives as well as abstinence.


The news, published in the April issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health, is just the latest proof that the $1.5 billion dollar "just say no to sex" experiment on our teens has failed.


And while Christian conservatives defend their approach even in the face of this latest devastating news, it’s time to ask them one simple question: Shouldn’t the results matter?


At current rates, half of all teenagers will have sex before graduating high school, and 95 percent will before marrying.


These statistics infuriate the abstinence-until-marriage proponents. Their hope is that, by keeping teens in the dark about protection, ignorance will somehow lead to temperance.


Those most committed to the abstinence approach seem to have paid most dearly though. Earlier findings by researchers at Yale and Columbia Universities revealed that teens taking part in virginity pledge programs (they pledge to stay virgins until marriage) are more likely than their non-pledging peers to engage in risky unprotected sex.


The study also showed virgin pledgers were six times more likely to have oral sex and male "virgins" are four times more likely to have anal sex than those who do not take the pledge. These "virgins" had the same rate of sexually transmitted diseases as other teens but were much less likely to be treated for them.


Southern school districts, which are five times more likely to use the abstinence-only approach than northeast schools, have much to show for investing in the abstinence-only.


Today, Southern states lead the country in the acquisition of STDs, are home to the highest rate of new HIV/AIDS cases and have the highest percentage of teen mothers.


The damage is so staggering that 19 states have opted to reject federal funding for abstinence only. In the long term, they concluded, the costs of their failure outweigh any benefits.


Abstinence is not the only policy that Christian conservatives pursue despite evidence that it doesn’t work. In fact, much of the movement’s policies have, even by their own standards, led to perverse outcomes.


Consider the drive to outlaw abortion. Last year, 14 states moved to ban abortion immediately and create a case to test Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court.


But, if ending abortion is the goal, banning abortion is quite possibly the worst strategy.


The countries with the highest abortion rates in the world are those that have banned abortion. Take Latin America, where most countries have outlawed abortion yet have the same rate or – as in the case of Peru, Chile and Brazil – rates twice as high as the United States.


And where on earth have the lowest abortion rates been achieved? In countries with the strongest pro-choice policies, such as the Netherlands, Germany and Italy, where abortion is not only legal but in several cases available free of charge.


This pro-choice policy/lower abortion rate trend has been true in our country as well. We witnessed the most dramatic decline in abortion in the history of our country under our first pro-choice president, Bill Clinton.


These declines continue today and notably where it is falling sharpest is where the strongest pro-choice policies, namely prevention through wider access to contraception, have been adopted.


And while banning abortion has failed to stop abortions, limiting abortion rights has also produced undesired outcomes. A favorite tactic of the right-to-life movement is to impose mandatory delay policies on abortion.


A woman must receive information about her right to an abortion and then must wait 24 to 48 hours before receiving a procedure. Sounds harmless enough.


However, while these policies have had little effect on the frequency of abortion, they may increase the number of late-term abortions. In the year after Mississippi passed a mandatory delay law, second-trimester abortion increased from 7.5 percent of abortions to 11.5 percent among women whose closest provider was in-state.


The danger of policies guided by ideology is that the means often are the end. There is no better example of the deleterious effects of policies based on wishful thinking than in the reproductive rights debate.


We need to respect people’s ability to make their own life decisions and not impose our values and views upon them.


If Americans were to set aside the catchy sound bites and suspiciously simplistic reasoning and instead judge by results, most would find the pro-choice movement is a more comfortable home for their stated values.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2006
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 8:16am

I think they make some good points. They hit the reason I do not lobby to make abortion illegal on the head. I think regardless of legality we need to educate and prevent. If abortion was made illegal tomorrow I would feel I had a LOT of work today to catch education and support systems up with the current law.

As for abstinence only programs, they make me shudder












Photobucket

I love my computer
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 9:46am
Very interesting- but not surprising at all.
.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2005
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 3:45pm
I wasn't all that surprised either... GMTA, huh? LOL!

Photobucket


Powered by Lorf!

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2008
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 4:39pm
No surprise here, either.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 4:40pm
For sure~ and you are looking mighty hot in the new siggy!
.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2004
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 4:46pm

Following comment directed at the originators of abstinence-only and NOT at you!

Um...Doy?

Of course it does not and would never work! Maybe on a few individuals, but not as a 'strategy' for reducing teenage pregnancy. How in the heck was PREVENTING teens being well-informed going to make them safer?


Powered by CGISpy.com pregnancy
baby siggy
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 6:37pm

"How in the heck was PREVENTING teens being well-informed going to make them safer?"

It never has. In my studies of history, I have never seen any society attempt to both push back the age of marriage to mid-adulthood while simultaneously trying to stop unmarried people from having sex. In fact, despite what lots of people think of the Puritan and Victorian ages, I've never seen any society with a decent success rate on preventing teenage sex.




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-29-2008
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 9:56pm

I swear i already posted on this message but maybe i forgot to hit "post reply" or it got deleted....so here i go again...


"And where on earth have the lowest abortion rates been achieved? In countries with the strongest pro-choice policies, such as the Netherlands, Germany and Italy, where abortion is not only legal but in several cases available free of charge.


This pro-choice policy/lower abortion rate trend has been true in our country as well. We witnessed the most dramatic decline in abortion in the history of our country under our first pro-choice president, Bill Clinton."


That is really interesting to know and i never even thought of those type of statistics. My PL friend can never give me an answer to what would happen to all those children if abortion were to be illegal, but i guess they would still get aborted based on that data.


"New research reveals that female students in programs that promote abstinence exclusively are more likely to get pregnant than those in programs that teach about the full range of contraceptives as well as abstinence."


I really don't get how anyone would think people would just ignore their body and abstain until marriage. What about gay people that live where marriage is illegal for them? Should they just become cellibate?


"These "virgins" had the same rate of sexually transmitted diseases as other teens but were much less likely to be treated for them."


Because they don't know what is wrong with them and they are not in a family unit where sexual things

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2008
Sat, 04-19-2008 - 11:34pm

~That is really interesting to know and i never even...~


It's similar here (pro-choice policy/lower abortion rate than the US).

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2004
Mon, 04-21-2008 - 8:36am

< In my studies of history, I have never seen any society attempt to both push back the age of marriage to mid-adulthood while simultaneously trying to stop unmarried people from having sex. In fact, despite what lots of people think of the Puritan and Victorian ages, I've never seen any society with a decent success rate on preventing teenage sex.>


Excellent point! I believe that if you were unmarried by the age of 25, you were considered an old maid in Victorian Britain. I think (I may be wrong) that the age of consent was 12 for girls when Queen Victoria came to the throne.


baby siggy

Pages