![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
A recent study of randomized students shows that abstinence-only education is more effective than both comprehensive and "safe sex" programs.
Color me somewhat surprised. I would have thought the comprehensive the most effective.
Color me somewhat surprised. I would have thought the comprehensive the most effective.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 12:31 am (UTC)Particularly,I'd want to find out how the amount of post-lesson sexual activity was measured, and how long after the lesson(s) were concluded was it measured.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 02:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 02:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 10:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 01:02 am (UTC)Site in question is WebMD if anyone cares to know beforehand.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 04:46 am (UTC)Young teens are the least capable persons to deal with the possible negative consequences of sex. As long as we can delay the start of their sexual experience, we decrease the likelihood of bad outcomes. Delay is the key word, not eliminate. No one is saying that we should attempt to prevent young persons from ever becoming sexually active. We're just trying to hold them back a little bit until they're better able to deal with the consequences.
Compare Abstinence-Only with Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE). Most 5th-graders around here get exposed to DARE. 5 years later, the effect of DARE has disappeared. 9th Graders who got DARE in 5th grade are no less likely to do drugs as 9th Graders who didn't. But what about 6th Graders? The question is whether it held some back from starting so young.
Taking drugs is something we'd prefer kids never do, so DARE's results are disappointing. On the other hand, we expect most kids to grow up and become sexually active someday. If they'd just wait a little longer to do it, it's likely to be better for them, in lots of ways.
So, it's not about prudery. It's about waiting just a bit longer. As for morals, well, as the Commander of the Mars Station put it in C.S. Lewis's sci fi story, "Ministering Angels,"
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 05:31 am (UTC)So yes, this study shows that abstinence-only education delays sexual activities. That's good.
But it doesn't necessarily show that it makes them any more (or less, of course) prepared to deal with the consequences when they do become sexually active.
I'm not sure how exactly you would classify the sex ed I had. We were told about the anatomical and physiological difference and changes (boring), warned about STIs (usually with stupidly disgusting slideshows - NOT effective, at all), told what methods of birth control and contraception can (and cannot) protect again (and how reliable they are), and we were told that the best way to avoid any problems is to simply not do it (abstention).
Personally, I feel what I got was effective (except for the shock-value STI stuff). When I did make the decision to become sexually active, I understood what I was getting into, and how to go about it in a responsible fashion.