Surprise!
From the "Well, Duh" Department: Abstinence Only sex education programs don't work very well, at least according to a study cited in a Minneapolis Star Tribune article published today.
Students who participated in sexual abstinence programs were just as likely to have sex within a few years as those who did not, according to a long-awaited study mandated by Congress.
Keep in mind that the federal government annually sends states a total of $50 million to cover the costs of these programs and that the states who have opted into the program have to kick in $3 for every $4 dollars of federal grant money accepted.
Opponents of the abstinence only programs are I-told-you-so-ing, and rightfully so, given the basis for promoting the programs:
"The message is we're investing in things that have an ideological appeal but have no evidence of making a difference in young people's lives," said Brigid Riley, executive director of the Minnesota Organization on Adolescent Pregnancy, Prevention and Parenting, which has been critical of government funding for programs urging students to abstain from sex.
Promoters of the program are complaining that the study was flawed, skewed, and generally useless. The language of their complaints are telling, however:
Tom Prichard, president of the Minnesota Family Council, which takes the opposite position, said the study failed to measure the effect of repeated abstinence programming. [Emphasis added.
"Programming"? Interesting choice of words, eh? Adolescents are to be "programmed." I suppose one could program a cat into using a toilet and into flushing it afterwards, but I'm not so sure it would be worth the effort.
Look, I have no objection to including a section on abstinence in any sex education program. Most people in this country don't want 14 year olds having sex. Most people also don't want 14 year olds having babies or contracting diseases, so, given the hormonal surges in this age group, a more mature approach would also add sections on the importance of protected sex to avoid pregnancy and to avoid STDs, and would discuss the nature of intimacy.
Apparently that's asking too much from the religious ideologues currently in power.
Students who participated in sexual abstinence programs were just as likely to have sex within a few years as those who did not, according to a long-awaited study mandated by Congress.
Keep in mind that the federal government annually sends states a total of $50 million to cover the costs of these programs and that the states who have opted into the program have to kick in $3 for every $4 dollars of federal grant money accepted.
Opponents of the abstinence only programs are I-told-you-so-ing, and rightfully so, given the basis for promoting the programs:
"The message is we're investing in things that have an ideological appeal but have no evidence of making a difference in young people's lives," said Brigid Riley, executive director of the Minnesota Organization on Adolescent Pregnancy, Prevention and Parenting, which has been critical of government funding for programs urging students to abstain from sex.
Promoters of the program are complaining that the study was flawed, skewed, and generally useless. The language of their complaints are telling, however:
Tom Prichard, president of the Minnesota Family Council, which takes the opposite position, said the study failed to measure the effect of repeated abstinence programming. [Emphasis added.
"Programming"? Interesting choice of words, eh? Adolescents are to be "programmed." I suppose one could program a cat into using a toilet and into flushing it afterwards, but I'm not so sure it would be worth the effort.
Look, I have no objection to including a section on abstinence in any sex education program. Most people in this country don't want 14 year olds having sex. Most people also don't want 14 year olds having babies or contracting diseases, so, given the hormonal surges in this age group, a more mature approach would also add sections on the importance of protected sex to avoid pregnancy and to avoid STDs, and would discuss the nature of intimacy.
Apparently that's asking too much from the religious ideologues currently in power.
Labels: "Well, Duh", Separation of Church and State
posted by Diane at 3:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home