Abstinence-only programs don't work.
or; the proof is in the pudding.
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
I read this article today in the Deseret Morning News, and I thought you'd find it interesting: Abstinence education not working, study finds
WASHINGTON — Programs that focus exclusively on abstinence have not been shown to affect teenager sexual behavior, although they are eligible for tens of millions of dollars in federal grants, according to a study released by a nonpartisan group that seeks to reduce teen pregnancies.
"At present there does not exist any strong evidence that any abstinence program delays the initiation of sex, hastens the return to abstinence or reduces the number of sexual partners" among teenagers, the study concluded.
Very interesting. I seem to hear the opposite quite often, especially from some of the members of this site.
Let's read some more of the story:
The study found that while abstinence-only efforts appear to have little positive impact, more comprehensive sex education programs were having "positive outcomes" including teenagers "delaying the initiation of sex, reducing the frequency of sex, reducing the number of sexual partners and increasing condom or contraceptive use."
The study, conducted by Douglas Kirby, a senior research scientist at ETR Associates, also sought to debunk what the report called "myths propagated by abstinence-only advocates" including: that comprehensive sex education promotes promiscuity, hastens the initiation of sex or increases its frequency, and sends a confusing message to adolescents.
None of these was found to be accurate, Kirby wrote.
Instead, he wrote, such programs improved teens' knowledge about the risks and consequences of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and gave them greater "confidence in their ability to say 'no' to unwanted sex."
So there.
Now, I already know the angle the "abstinence only" people will take - this study was conducted by a group of researchers working for a company that has created some of the 48 programs reviewed, so you'll say it was skewed in favor of the more comprehensive studies. But if anything, it's the exact opposite - this isn't people trying to prove how good their own stuff is as much as trying to decide in what direction they need to take their own product. I'm sure that if they found that abstinence only programs worked as well or better than the comprehensive ones, that they'd be industriously creating their own abstinence only programs to market.
So suck on that, people. Turns out the more you know about sex, the better you can make the best decisions about it - despite what some religious zealots would have you believe.
WASHINGTON — Programs that focus exclusively on abstinence have not been shown to affect teenager sexual behavior, although they are eligible for tens of millions of dollars in federal grants, according to a study released by a nonpartisan group that seeks to reduce teen pregnancies.
"At present there does not exist any strong evidence that any abstinence program delays the initiation of sex, hastens the return to abstinence or reduces the number of sexual partners" among teenagers, the study concluded.
Very interesting. I seem to hear the opposite quite often, especially from some of the members of this site.
Let's read some more of the story:
The study found that while abstinence-only efforts appear to have little positive impact, more comprehensive sex education programs were having "positive outcomes" including teenagers "delaying the initiation of sex, reducing the frequency of sex, reducing the number of sexual partners and increasing condom or contraceptive use."
The study, conducted by Douglas Kirby, a senior research scientist at ETR Associates, also sought to debunk what the report called "myths propagated by abstinence-only advocates" including: that comprehensive sex education promotes promiscuity, hastens the initiation of sex or increases its frequency, and sends a confusing message to adolescents.
None of these was found to be accurate, Kirby wrote.
Instead, he wrote, such programs improved teens' knowledge about the risks and consequences of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and gave them greater "confidence in their ability to say 'no' to unwanted sex."
So there.
Now, I already know the angle the "abstinence only" people will take - this study was conducted by a group of researchers working for a company that has created some of the 48 programs reviewed, so you'll say it was skewed in favor of the more comprehensive studies. But if anything, it's the exact opposite - this isn't people trying to prove how good their own stuff is as much as trying to decide in what direction they need to take their own product. I'm sure that if they found that abstinence only programs worked as well or better than the comprehensive ones, that they'd be industriously creating their own abstinence only programs to market.
So suck on that, people. Turns out the more you know about sex, the better you can make the best decisions about it - despite what some religious zealots would have you believe.
