Date: 2010-02-02 12:31 am (UTC)
ext_37422: three leds (Default)
From: [identity profile] dianavilliers.livejournal.com
Considering the source of the report, I'd want to see the original paper before giving it a huge amount of credence.
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.
Edited Date: 2010-02-02 12:31 am (UTC)

Date: 2010-02-02 02:04 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] stryck.livejournal.com
Generally speaking, the folks at The Corner are good at linking to things if they're available online.

Date: 2010-02-02 02:05 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] stryck.livejournal.com
Which is to imply that I don't think the study details are currently available online. Normally I read the source for myself, but I haven't been able to find it.

Date: 2010-02-02 03:31 am (UTC)
ext_37422: three leds (Default)
From: [identity profile] dianavilliers.livejournal.com
Yeah, I don't currently have access to an academic library. I could ask my flatmate to look it up, but she's a bit busy packing at the moment.

Date: 2010-02-02 10:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kishiriadgr.livejournal.com
Given that I'm back in the 'Stan I don't have time to link you, but I know the CDC has come up with opposite results. I like the National Review, but I do have to consider their bias when reading it.

Date: 2010-02-02 01:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] xaq.livejournal.com
Same study, different site, fairly different interpretation.

Site in question is WebMD if anyone cares to know beforehand.

Date: 2010-02-02 04:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] aefenglommung.livejournal.com
The Washington Post's lede was something like, "Abstinence-only delays sex in young teens." Which is the point.

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,"
Who ever tried to live clean, unless they had a religion -- or were in love?

Date: 2010-02-02 05:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] neppyman.livejournal.com
I'd agree that delaying sexual activities is a good thing. Most teenagers aren't ready to handle that kind of responsibility. But there will always be people who choose to engage or partake, and it's important for them to know how to do so in a responsible fashion (how to avoid unwanted pregnancies and STIs).

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.

Profile

alpharaposa: (Default)
alpharaposa

January 2023

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
29 3031    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 4th, 2025 08:39 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios