Skip to comments.Teen sex increased after abstinence program Texas study finds no impact on sexual behavior
Posted on 02/01/2005 11:28:59 AM PST by nyg4168
HOUSTON - Abstinence-only sex education programs, a major plank in President George W. Bushs education plan, have had no impact on teenagers behavior in his home state of Texas, according to a new study.
Despite taking courses emphasizing abstinence-only themes, teenagers in 29 high schools became increasingly sexually active, mirroring the overall state trends, according to the study conducted by researchers at Texas A&M University.
We didnt see any strong indications that these programs were having an impact in the direction desired, said Dr. Buzz Pruitt, who directed the study.
The study was delivered to the Texas Department of State Health Services, which commissioned it.
The federal government is expected to spend about $130 million to fund programs advocating abstinence in 2005, despite a lack of evidence that they work, Pruitt said.
The jury is still out, but most of what weve discovered shows theres no evidence the large amount of money spent is having an effect, he said.
The study showed about 23 percent of ninth-grade girls, typically 13 to 14 years old, had sex before receiving abstinence education. After taking the course, 29 percent of the girls in the same group said they had had sex.
Boys in the tenth grade, about 14 to 15 years old, showed a more marked increase, from 24 percent to 39 percent, after receiving abstinence education.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Pull your kid out of public school.
I will say it again and again - this belongs in the home and not school!
Agreed. This falls under morality, and that is something for the government to keep its chubby fingers out of. Teach your kids in the home, or don't teach them anything - its up to the parents, not your neighbors and the bureaucrats.
No cause and effect. The kids got a year older, so more of them were active.
The number of teen having sex will fluctuate from year to year, but given the right tools and information they can at least greatly lessen the chance of picking up an STD or knocking/getting knocked up.
Yes, they got more active as they got a year older, but those who got abstinence education got more active at the same rate as those who did not get the education. So the abstinence education didn't seem to have any effect.
"The federal government is expected to spend about $130 million to fund programs advocating abstinence in 2005, despite a lack of evidence that they work, Pruitt said."
The Federal Government is wasting money? I'm shocked! </sarcasm
The program was a Bush idea. The Democrats in Texas couldn't back any program he had anything to do with so they told their kids he was wrong. "It is NOT a good thing to abstain". Naturally, all the little Dem kids followed their parents advice and went out and had sex.
Just what I was thinking. Are they going to actually give these "researchers' at A&M a degree for this claptrap?
Weeee! Look at ME!!!
In twenty years more of the girls will be sexually active.I's a Porfeshimanl Reesurcher.
I may be missing something, but i didn't see anyplace where the article compared abstinence only to the other programs as far as increase in sexual activity. Did I just not see it?
I don't think that any form of sex education in school is going to succeed in encouraging abstinence, unless the same message is heard clearly at home. And earlier points that abstinence/sexual education belongs in the home are pretty true. However, schools providing a "safe sex" message - let alone, "explore your potential homosexuality" are extremely counterproductive.
I'm sure. When faced with such a counter-intuitive study, the only conclusion is that the entrenched interests cooked the numbers and/or that the instructors charged with implementing the program didn't believe in it and did their own thing. Possible? Yes. Likely? Yes.
I was just going to say; that has never stopped Democrats. In fact, if we follow their paradigm...all we need is MORE money.
D.A.R.E. (Drug and Alchohal Resistance Education) doesn't work either and has actually led to an INCREASE in kids abusing substances.
it's a government sponsored band-aid applied to appease parents too lazy/scared/self-absorbed/embarrased to talk to and police their own kids.
I forbade my daughter to attend, and raised a HUGE stink over it when she was in Fifth Grade. Told the counselers WHY to, and backed it allup with data.
"Teen sex increased after abstinence program Texas study finds no impact on sexual behavior"
By our no-fault divorce laws, primary custody of children is given to the most adulterous parents. Propaganda from public schools and other organizations for children make heroes (and heroines) of those who promoted adultery in many subtle ways. While they're relatively young and healthy, promiscuous people are the first to be hired and promoted.
150 years after romanticism was established in the USA, motivations for such behavior are many.
> sending kids mixed signals is a great way to educate them
Sometimes. Consider the 2nd Amendment, and how to teach about it:
If you see a situation with the potential for criminal violence to be acted out upon you (such as a riot), avoid it. However, if you nevertheless find yourself in the midst of the situation with no way to extract yourself from it.... the safety is located *here* on the gun.
If that were true I would have picked up an STD in college. Never did.
Condoms work, and they work really well. They have a failure rate that teenagers should be made aware of, but they're a hell of a lot better than nothing. It would be irresponsible for us to teach them about sex and then not give them the tools that they need to have safe sex.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.