Does anything work in sex education?A study shows that abstinence education programmes don't work. They had the same failure rate as contraceptive programmes. Doesn't that show neither of them works?
Let me give a bit of background, for the benefit of readers not immersed in US politics over the funding of sex programmes. The federal government began funding abstinence education programmes in 1998. This, after many years and millions of dollars spent funding programmes that teach contraception as a neutral technology that fourth graders can choose to use or not as their wisdom decrees. In the last election, the Democrats took control of Congress. Given their record on moral issues, it is likely they will reduce or eliminate the funding for abstinence education. Their move will be to fund only “comprehensive sex education,” which in practice means programmes that teach contraception first, sexual activity as an entitlement and abstinence as an afterthought. If those are the alternatives, it is fair to ask whether sex-ed programmes any more successful than abstinence programmes. Let’s listen to some experts. A 2002 study published in the British Medical Journal examined 26 programmes that included school based programmes, multi-faceted programmes, family planning and clinic based programmes, as well as abstinence programmes in the US and Canada. The results: “The interventions did not delay initiation of sexual intercourse in young women or young men, did not improve the use of birth control at every intercourse, or at last intercourse for either men or women, did not reduce pregnancy rates in young women.”[2] Another study of a very well-designed and well-delivered sex-ed programme in Scotland was also published in the BMJ. The result: “When the intervention group was compared with the conventional sex education group, there were no differences in sexual activity or sexual risk taking by the age of 16 years.”[3] Then there is Douglas Kirby’s 2001 survey of over 300 programmes of all sorts. “Most studies of school-based and school-linked health centers revealed no effect on student sexual behavior or contraceptive use.”[4] Finding programmes that don’t work is not very difficult. Programmes based in schools, whether of the sex-ed or abstinence variety, do not work very well at reducing teen pregnancy. Adults coming into the classroom and yammering about sex, whether for it or agin’ it, just do not have much impact on teens. When you think about it, this is not surprising. We know from other kinds of studies that the biggest protective factors for delaying teen sex are married parents and religious observance. Some of the sex-ed studies confirm this by showing that within their little samples, family composition, parental supervision, parental expectations for behavior are among the biggest protective factors. In other words, what is going on at home completely dwarfs anything that is going on at school. As Dr Trevor Stammers, a wise British commentator put it: “Much teenage sex has little do with sex itself, but is connected with searching for meaning, identity and belonging.”[5] That is why some of the more successful programmes include substantial after school and community-based components. The Best Friends abstinence programme, for instance, is not a classroom-based curriculum. It promotes abstinence among teens from inner-city school districts by fostering self-respect and sound decision-making. It includes mentoring for at least 45 minutes a week, group discussions every three weeks, role model presentation, and enrollment in fitness and dance classes. It has had great success at reducing teen pregnancy both at the middle school and high school levels.[6] Some successful programmes don’t even talk about sex. Douglas Kirby again: “One group of effective programs were service learning programs. These programs include voluntary or unpaid service in the community (eg, tutoring, working as a teachers’ aide or working in nursing homes) and structured time for preparation and reflection before, during and after service, (e.g. group discussions, journal writing or papers). ...(S)tudies, have consistently indicated that service learning either delays sexual activity or reduces teenage pregnancy. However, not all service learning programs addressed sexual or contraceptive behavior. Why then did they change behavior? ... "There are many plausible explanations. The programs may in fact have increased connectedness to caring adults (some of whom may have expressed clear norms about avoiding sex)...they may increased autonomy, or they may simply have occupied a fair amount of discretionary time during which the students might have otherwise been unsupervised at home and might have engaged in unprotected sex.” If it is possible to reduce teen pregnancy without even discussing sex, I am not particularly troubled about a report on just four abstinence programmes which have already been superseded by other, more sophisticated programmes. Even the Mathematica study does not denigrate abstinence programmes, but instead emphasises: “Some policymakers and health educators have questioned whether the Title V, Section 510 programs’ focus on abstinence elevates STD risks. Findings from this study suggest that this is not the case, as program youth are no more likely to engage in unprotected sex than their control group counterparts.” The real questions about abstinence education are these. Given that family structure and religious practice are significant protective factors against teen sexual activity, shouldn’t the federal government support marriage and religion? Given that many, many sex-ed programmes do nothing to reduce teen pregnancy, why are we even considering pouring more federal money into Planned Parenthood-type organizations to promote their ideology of human sexuality? And if we are going to pump money into sex-ed programmes of dubious value -- and even more dubious values -- why isn’t it a slam dunk that we should fund abstinence programmes at an equal level? Of course, there is one other possibility. Given that human connectedness is what kids seek in sex, the federal government could stop spending any money at all on sending ladies into classrooms to hector the kids about sex. We could leave this very human problem to the states, localities, or school boards. Or we could even leave it to parents to talk to their kids about sex. Just a thought. Jennifer Roback Morse is the Senior Research Fellow in Economics at the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, and the author of Smart Sex: Finding Life-long Love in a Hook-up World. Notes [1] “Impact of Four Title V, Section 510 Abstinence Education Programmes," Mathematica, April 2007 [2] Di Censo, Alba, et al. “Interventions to reduce unintended pregnancies among adolescents: systematic review of randomized controlled trials,” British Medical Journal 324, 15 June 2002 [3] Wight, Daniel, et al. “Limits of teacher delivered sex education: interim behavioral outcomes from randomized trial.” British Medical Journal 324, 15 June 2002 [4] Kirby, Douglas, “Understanding What Works and What Doesn’t in Reducing Adolescent Sexual Risk-Taking,” Family Planning Perspectives 33(6): 276-81, (November/ December 2001) [5] Stammers, Trevor, “Sexual health in adolescents,” British Medical Journal 334, 20 January 2007 [6] Young, Michael and Penhollow, Tina, “The Impact of Abstinence Education: What does the Research Say?” American Journal of Health Education 37(4) July/August 2006, 194-202 |
relatedarticlesmorebythisauthorfreeupdates |
Home | SiteMap | 
RSS | Atom | 
del.icio.us | Privacy Policy |
MercatorNet - New Media Foundation Ltd © 2004 - 2008 All rights reserved
Comment (9)
Email
Print
Technorati
digg
Abstinence education doesn’t work. That was the big hoopla in the American press over the publication of a
Comments (9)
Denis Ambrose said...Maybe finally the gov’t will stop trying to take the place of parents.
United States | Sunday, 6 May 2007 at 8:17 am
Sachiko Ogura said...My grandmother who was Buddhist used to tell me, my brothers and sisters that we are to live a life of human beings, which is to fight against all temptations. If you can control of your desire, you can become a leader. Do not fall into the level of animals. Respect your body as well as others. This was her sex educations to her grandchildren. She also warned us that whatever you do you can never get away from the eyes of God. I am Catholic (converted) but when I became Catholic my grandmother told me “I do not know that religion but I trust that you must have found the best way to go to God to whom I have been praying all the time.” Our father died at the age of 40 leaving his wife, our mother, and six children. While our mother worked hard to feed us our grandmother raised and educated all our family. We are now all happily married and blessed with children and grandchildren.
Canada | Sunday, 6 May 2007 at 1:26 pm
Guillaume said...As I was a teenager, I never found that sex ed classes were convincing. They never taught anything worth remembering in terms of morals and values. In fact, the only lessons that I remembered about sexuality are the ones my parents taught me at home.
This article is, in my opinion, pointing to the obvious fact that many social workers have forgotten today: sexuality is a very private and intimate part of people’s lives. It therefore comes as no surprise that they would not let strangers intervene into it.
Too bad this article is in English only. It would greatly benefit some of my compatriots to read it.
France | Friday, 11 May 2007 at 9:55 pm
Maria said...I agree with Guillaume’s comments. It is a very private issue belonging to the parents to impart to the children. I spoke to 3 classes on this topic last year (I teach natural family planning) and I can tell you everyone, including me, was embarrassed. We all have that natural aversion to having something intimate put forth in the public spectrum.
-- | Saturday, 12 May 2007 at 1:22 pm
Carmen said...An interesting article on a subject area very close to my heart. When my children (I have 5) were at the age when I needed to give them more detailed information about their sexuality and appropriate sexual behaviour I had neither the knowledge nor the experience (from my parents) to talk to them. My own experience was all I had but any current statisics and information regarding STI’s and contraceptives was totally non-existent. Luckily, I came across a Christian schools based program on sexuality and relationships that includes the education of parents that did’nt just teach the physical but taught the spiritual, emotional, social and intellectual aspects of this subject area. An all encompassing whole-day program that put everything into a new perspective for young people seeking to find themselves in a world full of confusing media messages. I am now a facilitator of this program helping to spread the good news.
Bahamas | Wednesday, 16 May 2007 at 11:40 pm
Granny said...Only parents know their children well enough to know when and how and what to teach them on this subject. Even parents who have no education can teach their children...mostly by example.
Parents teach their children by the way the treat each other and how they welcome new life into their families. If children need to know about sex...it should be their parents who teach them.
The Church has the responsibility to teach parents how to be good Catholics...or Christians ... or Buddhists etc. If parents are following the rules… their children will not be viewing sex and violence on TV or finding contraceptive pills in the medicine cabinet...or condoms in their parents bedrooms etc. Each new baby will be breastfed (unless there is a medical reason not to) and the children will be shown how to be modest in their dress and in their communications. When it is time for courtship...they will have the benefit of parental guidance and explanation of natural family planning when it is time for marriage.
United States | Wednesday, 20 June 2007 at 12:43 am
Carmen said...Sure church has a reponsibility to teach parents how to be good parents BUT if the parents are not going to church how do THEY learn. If we keep the doors of our homes closed and teach only within our homes then we are not doing what God has asked of us, “Go out to all the world and spread the good news”. In a world that has been highly sexualized and badly damaged young people’s perception of sexuality, there is an urgent need for good moral and ethical people to provide healthy and solid sex education.
I agree that it is the parent’s job to teach their own children but many have neither the information or the skill to teach what is being thrown at everyone who comes into contact with any television,newspaper,magazine,internet,movies, books,music etc… Sure you can protect your children to a certain degree but in order to live in this world we all must eventually come into contact with the media in one way or another. How can we deal with it if we have not been educated adequately???
Australia | Friday, 6 July 2007 at 1:21 pm
Granny said...Preach the Gospel always..and when necessary, use words. St.Francis said this to one of his Brothers...and it is a good
message for those of us who are given the responsibility to evangelize our brothers and sisters within and without our families. Let it Begin with Me .. is another good point. If we are living chaste lives ..it will show. If we pray we will hear
the Holy Spirit inform us when it is a “teaching moment” Opportunities will arise ... and when they don’t our persona will leave a lasting impression and our prayers will accompany those we pray for so that someone else will come into their life and show them in a more concrete way how to be chaste. Chastity is a virtue necessary for everyone. Let it begin with me.
United States | Friday, 6 July 2007 at 11:21 pm
Elizabeth Kinsey said...Sexual education has a place in the family only, and if the parents are not game to pass it validly to their children, they can educate themselves on how to do it. Caring parents try to do just that. The language of marital love should be reserved to be discovered by couples and not to be devalued by public broadcasting indiscriminately.
That is why the well meaning teachers feel embarrassment-(VIDE Maria’s comment) this massage has been imprinted on our hearts, and the embarrassment is our reaction to the clumsy handling in a public forum of what is not meant to be public (and I do not mean that it should be a taboo, ONLY THAT IS DESERVES RESPECT), Because it is meant to be unique for each person, millions times over, as many families are created on this earth.
When are we going to give love and its expressions the respect it deserves? The current didactic efforts in schools and cultural permissiveness prove disastrous the world over, abusing the minds and spirits of the young and trampling upon the most precious gift that we have been endowed with.
Sachiko Ogura’s comment proves that the principles of discovery of who we are are open to all people of good will regardless of culture and even religion.
-- | Wednesday, 18 July 2007 at 12:41 pm
Page 1 of 1 :
New comment