raveneye

My 4-year-old daughter knows a lot about babies, having watched her pet mouse mama and papa have three litters. She knows that "cuddling" first happens, then the mama becomes pregnant.

Since both mom and dad are professional biologists, we don't try to shield her from very much.

It's nice to see that research has shown that the best sex education for girls (defined in terms of avoiding unwanted pregnancy and diseases) is exactly that: education, not indoctrination. (see the article appended below)

I doubt that the Bush administration is going to pay any attention to the research, but at least it is being publicized.



Data show abstinence ed failing

Marina Pisano
San Antonio Express-News

The Bush administration has invested heavily in abstinence-only sex education and it is officially supported in Texas schools, but new research may bolster critics who say those programs are not effective in delaying teens' sexual activity and reducing unintended pregnancies.

Teen sex research

During a news briefing Tuesday presented by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, researchers and a public policy expert said research shows that comprehensive sexuality education — abstinence-plus instead of abstinence-only — is best.

The institute is affiliated with Planned Parenthood, which distributes contraception.

The speakers said comprehensive education is vitally needed for public health and the prevention of teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.

Researcher Peter Bearman, director of Columbia University's Institute for Social and Economic Research and Policy, said his sampling of 4,877 sexually active females ages 15 to 19 revealed teen attitudes are important in reducing the risk of pregnancy.

Bearman said programs that emphasize abstinence are marked by negativity about pregnancy and contraceptives.

"But our research shows that sexually active females with a negative attitude toward pregnancy are just as likely to become pregnant as those with a positive attitude toward pregnancy. But both groups are much less likely to become pregnant if they have a positive attitude toward contraception."

In addition to the results, which are part of a larger national study sample, Bearman cited data drawn from 20,000 adolescents and young adults who have been followed since 1995. That ongoing research showed that virginity pledges — no sex before marriage — work only for a few. He found that more than 88 percent of adolescents taking virginity pledges break them before marriage.

He said pledges delayed first sex an average of about 18 months for adolescents ages 14 to 16. Pledging teens are less likely to use contraceptives at first sex, so he found their gains in preventing pregnancy are "washed out."

While teens taking pledges may have fewer sex partners, they have the same rates of sexually transmitted diseases.

"There's no protection from pledging," he said.

Bearman's study, co-authored with Hannah Brückner of Yale University, was published Tuesday in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.

braisler

So, what is abstinence-plus? Is that like, "NEW & Improved! Abstinence, now with lemony scent!" Either you are having sex or you are abstaining from sex.

I kind of figure that they are refering to a program that teaches kids about sexuality, masturbation, and contraception in addition to the abstinence-is-best diatribe. Kind of funny way to put it, though.

I agree that kids are recieving conflicting messages about sex. Whether a young-adult chooses to have sex or not, I fail to see the harm in informing them about methods of contraception that are available. I think that Christians think that if we teach our kids about condoms and contraception we are giving them permission to have sex freely. Bunk. Moralist bunk.

Ripsaw

The first failure is relying on the government -on any level- to educate our children.
The second is not driving home the importance of being ready to have children, which are a natural and inevitable consequence of having sex, protection or not. And by being ready I mean physically, emotionally, and financially ready.

The conflicting messages that are being broadcast need to be tempered by understanding parents, not sent through a polarized filter so that the only images that remain are the Teletubbies and Blue's Clues.

__________________
"We are supposed to be masters of space, but we cant even line up our shoes?"

One life, one chance, one opportunity.

hulk

Back in year 10, our health class had a bunch of new doctors come in and play a slideshow of various nasty VD's. That was the single most successful safe sex-ed class I ever had.

Urk, the cheese...

__________________
"'There's a tendency among the press to attribute the creation of a game to a single person,' says Warren Spector, creator of Thief and Deus Ex."
-- From an IGN game review.

wnker85

Very True.

I agree with you on that, but in some places they are trying to teach kids this stuff at younger and younger ages. This is a subject in Jr. High at the earliest.

But, they big thing from us Christians is the way that they are teaching condoms and such. The parents would rather teach this themselves. The message of abstaing form sex is lost in putting a condom on a cucumber.
It's like that southpark with Mr mackee and Ms. Chockesondick, kids are not being taught the right way.

lurkette

This is what happens when policy-makers let ideology overrule common sense and evidence. There have been a number of studies on the failure of abstinence only (let me reiterate - abstinence ONLY) education to reduce risky sexual behaviors in teens.

Something like the ABC program they use in Uganda would be nice - Abstinence is the surest way to prevent pregnancy and STDs, but if you don't/can't/won't abstain, then Be faithful/monogamous and use Condoms. Uganda has had huge success with this program in terms of delaying onset of first sexual experience and reducing rates of unwanted pregnancy and STD transmission. "Abstinence only" education (and I use the word "education" loosely there) is kind of like not teaching your kids how to wear a seatbelt because they might drive too fast and crash into things if they know they're protected.

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

Bill O'Rights

Bravo! Excellent analogy! I'm writing that one down to use in the future.

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

raveneye

The Dutch model is the one I'm familiar with. It's subsidized by the government and emphasizes a solid biology-based sex education at an early age. I think about half of all primary schools in Holland have sex ed as part of their biology classes, and all the secondary schools. Of course contraception of all kinds is included.

Other important factors are: guaranteed anonymity in the healthcare system, non-judgemental approach to clinical treatment, openness about sex in the media.

Holland has the lowest teen pregnancy rate, lowest abortion rate, and highest age at first intercourse in Europe. I think the STD rate is also way low.

The U.S. could learn a lot from their example. Maybe someday.

billege

Abstinence only education has never really been about education, or facts. It's been about beliefs.

It's been about scaremongering, it's been about distorting facts until they fit, it's been about parents terrified of their own sexuality, and even more scared of kid's sexuality. Abstinence only education is more about shutting your eyes and repeating "there is no boogieman," and hoping it all works out. Abstinence only education has been about bad logic, half logic, and outright lies. It's about a lack of trust in children, and in parents themselves to make the right decisions.

Teaching abstinence is not wrong, but the way it's been taught is totally fucked.

Sexuality is still such an odd subject for us Americans. We soak ourselves in it, and we're scared shitless about it. We reject it, and embrace it. Full of contradictions we are.

Anyway.

Life is about informed choices. Abstinence only education does not lead to that.

Kids and adults have to be involved in sex education. Those parents terrified to talk about it, need to seek classes themselves. The importance of talking to your kid about smoking/drinking/drugs is advertised in several forms of media. I don't see any ads about how important talking to your kids about sex is. Do you?

When parents don't actually talk to their kids, assuming they have any knowledge to pass on, you get a reaction. Sometimes that reaction, by people who are just DYING to push sex ed in your face (for whatever reason), start teaching 3rd graders about intercourse. Then the story makes the news, and the Christians (primarily) freak out.
(Remember, most religions just LOVE persecution, they've been built on it; and, I don't think they can exist without it. So, you "persecute" them and they just get stronger.) Anyway, the sexually repressed majority freaks out. "You can't teach sex to 3rd graders, perverts!! etc. etc. etc." Then the pendulum swings. (duh.)

When that big brass bob swings back against the sex educators (who can get a bit overzealous themselves sometimes) we end up in the dark ages where "if you tell kids about condoms they'll run about mad having orgies!!" seems to carry weight with whole school boards. Those boards are made up of regular people btw, they're not politicians (well, on a small scale they are...) but by and far, school boards are you and me, and they have a lot of power when it comes to what kids do and don't see.

You freak out the parents, you push too hard, and they push back. You end up teaching abstinence only. It's not about cramming the facts about anal sex into 3rd graders heads, and it’s not about teaching them "sex is for marriage" then hoping it all works out. Like once you're married you're magically sexually astute, and able to handle it.

It is about teaching kids, roughly when they reach puberty (what? call it 8th grade?), about reality. Not "sexual" or "abstinent" reality, as life is not that black or white. It's about telling kids "here's how it works biologically."

"Your body can do this, and it's the most amazing thing a human body can do."

Once you've laid out for the little kiddies how tab A goes into Slot B, you've got the groundwork down. Now it's time to teach them what kind of responsibilities go with that. That's when you do have the classes, hand in hand, contraceptives/abstinence/OPTIONS. Real options.

In a public school, you don't cater to the 3423 religious variations. You look at the public health situation, and you remember you are the government, running a public school. You teach biology, life impacts, sexual realities (condoms/diseases/babies), and you teach abstinence as one of the many options a person has. Communicate to your parents, here's what we'd like our class to be like. I'd say have classes at school preceding your children’s classes, for parents to attend, but I'd bet you'd see about 30% parent participation. If that.

Life is sexual, and teaching everyone to pretend it's not real until marriage, is such a cop out. Pushing sex onto non-sexual children is the advancement of an agenda, and it's cheap also.

No one is really worried about the kids here. It's about pushing agendas.

The kids are losing.

__________________
I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence:
"My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend."