Abstinence Only Education Works Best: U of PA Study

[93henfan]

BTW Alice, how are you in the kitchen?

Exactly. What's for dinner tonight little lady?

[Ibanez]

It says right on the website that they promote conservative values, so I don't take much stock in this article.

It also looks like that same Heritage Foundation funded the study. Ya think that might have had something to do with the results?

Your thinking is the dangerous type. What makes you think that your ideas and points of view are the correct ones and ONLY the correct ones?



But, sex can wait, masterbate.

[Ibanez]

T-Man, I think that was wrong of you to put PFLs picture on your original post...before she even responded...

I see...no logical response, so you resort to making fun of my looks.

Hmm. I see the extent of your thinking process. Fascinating.

I still question the validity of this study. Then again, it's hardly surprising you use a loaded study, from an admittedly conservative website, to prove a point you already agreed with.

It might be nice if you posted something from the other side of the coin. I might be more inclined to take you seriously. I can see why Cap'n doesn't.

Using Cap'n Cat for a unbiased representative is foolhardy.

[youngterrier]

If your gonna play football you might as well wear pads...

seriously though, Ive taken sex ed classes more recently than anyone on here and Ive been taught birth control and absinence (I dont get any though). i doubt the school district i go to now teaches about birth control and i can tell in comparison

[Col Hogan]

I still question the validity of this study. Then again, it's hardly surprising you use a loaded study, from an admittedly conservative website, to prove a point you already agreed with.

It might be nice if you posted something from the other side of the coin. I might be more inclined to take you seriously. I can see why Cap'n doesn't.

Let's see...you question the validity of the study simply because its from a conservative source...with no counter information offered...

And you say if it came from a liberal source, you might be inclined to take it seriously...

And you're a grad student????


And by the way, if you're saying Cap doesn't take me seriously.....Thank you...that's the best news I've gotten today...

[JohnStOnge]

The key line reflecting what I always look for when a study is announced is this:

"These findings are based on a randomized controlled experiment."

I'd still like to see the details of the design but at least it's not an observational study...which is usually what the case is when studies on the effects of different "sex education" strategies are reported. I saw reference to this on news report this afternoon and a number of questions came to mind. One was whether or not it was a randomized controlled experiment. But another is: If it was purportedly randomized controlled experiment, how was that handled?

For instance, if you randomly assigned some students to the "treatment" and others to the "control" but all the students in the treatment group were "educated" in the same classroom by the same teacher, it could be something about the classroom or the teacher rather than the "treatment" itself. So I really wouldn't accept it as necessarily showing an effect of the abstinence only thing until I saw the details of the experimental design.

And, believe me, the fact that it was published in a peer review journal does not mean there are no problems with the experimental design. The peer review process is one of the most over rated things in our culture. I think people who think "peer review" necessarily means "quality control" have a false impression.

[travelinman67]

I still question the validity of this study. Then again, it's hardly surprising you use a loaded study, from an admittedly conservative website, to prove a point you already agreed with.

It might be nice if you posted something from the other side of the coin. I might be more inclined to take you seriously. I can see why Cap'n doesn't.

Since you apparently have a reading impairment (amongst your many others)...

...here's the Clinton News Network's (CNN) report on this:

Study: Abstinence program most effective at delaying sex among youths
By Ashley Hayes, CNN
February 2, 2010 6:28 p.m. EST

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/02/abstinence.study/

(CNN) -- An abstinence-only education program is more effective than other initiatives at keeping sixth- and seventh-graders from having sex within a two-year period, according to a study described by some as a landmark.

The study, published in the current issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, indicated that about one-third of the preteens and their young teen classmates who received an eight-hour abstinence lesson had sexual intercourse within two years of the class.

By comparison, more than half of the students who were taught about safe sex and condom use reported having intercourse by the two-year mark, and more than 40 percent of students who received either an eight- or 12-hour lesson incorporating both abstinence education and safe sex reported having sex at two years.

Among students who received instruction on overall good health, but not having to do with sex directly, nearly 47 percent had sexual activity in the two years after the class.

"This new study is game-changing," the nonpartisan National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy said in a statement. "For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex and reduce their recent sexual activity as well."

The study is "quality research" and "good science," said James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth. According to its Web site, the Washington-based organization promotes "a more positive and realistic approach to adolescent sexual health" in helping youths make informed and responsible decisions about sex and reproduction.

Now...

...shaddup and go fix me a sammy, woman!

[Benne]

I still question the validity of this study. Then again, it's hardly surprising you use a loaded study, from an admittedly conservative website, to prove a point you already agreed with.

It might be nice if you posted something from the other side of the coin. I might be more inclined to take you seriously. I can see why Cap'n doesn't.

Since you apparently have a reading impairment (amongst your many others)...

...here's the Clinton News Network's (CNN) report on this:

Study: Abstinence program most effective at delaying sex among youths
By Ashley Hayes, CNN
February 2, 2010 6:28 p.m. EST

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/02/abstinence.study/

(CNN) -- An abstinence-only education program is more effective than other initiatives at keeping sixth- and seventh-graders from having sex within a two-year period, according to a study described by some as a landmark.

The study, published in the current issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, indicated that about one-third of the preteens and their young teen classmates who received an eight-hour abstinence lesson had sexual intercourse within two years of the class.

By comparison, more than half of the students who were taught about safe sex and condom use reported having intercourse by the two-year mark, and more than 40 percent of students who received either an eight- or 12-hour lesson incorporating both abstinence education and safe sex reported having sex at two years.

Among students who received instruction on overall good health, but not having to do with sex directly, nearly 47 percent had sexual activity in the two years after the class.

"This new study is game-changing," the nonpartisan National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy said in a statement. "For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex and reduce their recent sexual activity as well."

The study is "quality research" and "good science," said James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth. According to its Web site, the Washington-based organization promotes "a more positive and realistic approach to adolescent sexual health" in helping youths make informed and responsible decisions about sex and reproduction.

Now...

...shaddup and go fix me a sammy, woman!

Based on the information I've found and you've provided, I would say the study will not be complete until the students are 18. But hey if it keeps kids as young as 12-15 from having sex, more power to it.

[ngineer]

It says right on the website that they promote conservative values, so I don't take much stock in this article.

It also looks like that same Heritage Foundation funded the study. Ya think that might have had something to do with the results?

So much for the credibility or objectivity...We all know "studies" can be slanted any way you want depending on your initial slant.

[ngineer]

Belittle it all you want, its fact that if you dont fu*k, you wont have kids you cant take care of.

Abstinence works every time its tried.

That's the problem. Theory does not meet reality. Palin's daughter being exhibit A. You can talk and preach all you want, but one night in the back seat of a Chevy, can destroy all the beautiful sermons, lectures and brochures.

[danefan]

Belittle it all you want, its fact that if you dont fu*k, you wont have kids you cant take care of.

Abstinence works every time its tried.

That's the problem. Theory does not meet reality. Palin's daughter being exhibit A. You can talk and preach all you want, but one night in the back seat of a Chevy, can destroy all the beautiful sermons, lectures and brochures.

Exactly

Abstinence is fine and dandy in theory and defnitely has a valuable place in the educational system. In reality, however, it needs to be supplemented with responsible sex ed starting as early as 7th grade, IMO.

[Appaholic]

[/b]

That's the problem. Theory does not meet reality. Palin's daughter being exhibit A. You can talk and preach all you want, but one night in the back seat of a Chevy, can destroy all the beautiful sermons, lectures and brochures.

Exactly

Abstinence is fine and dandy in theory and defnitely has a valuable place in the educational system. In reality, however, it needs to be supplemented with responsible sex ed starting as early as 7th grade, IMO.

HERETIC!.......

[Pwns]

Belittle it all you want, its fact that if you dont fu*k, you wont have kids you cant take care of.

Abstinence works every time its tried.

That's the problem. Theory does not meet reality. Palin's daughter being exhibit A. You can talk and preach all you want, but one night in the back seat of a Chevy, can destroy all the beautiful sermons, lectures and brochures.

And can you say for sure that if Palin's daughter had known about birth control then she would not have become pregnant? It's not like kids that get so-called "comprehensive sex education" never get pregnant. Some kids just aren't going to be smart and responsible, no matter what you do.

Our education system beats it into the brains of kids and teens repeatedly to wear their seatbelt...hasn't stopped many fatalities that very well could have been prevented with the seat belts. Kids in school have it repeatedly beaten into their heads to eat their vegetables and eat less junk food - doesn't stop obesity and unhealthy eating habits. Kids are constantly inundated with the facts about smoking on your health, doesn't stop new generations of smokers from cropping up.

You can talk to teens about every method of birth control under the sun. You can make sure every boy knows how to put on a condom. You can give away birth control for free in high schools. You can teach them all about the joys of oral sex. And some teens are going to get pregnant.

You can't save all kids from doing stupid things that could ruin their lives. You just can't. So you might as well go with the most effective sex ed. If that is abstinence-only, then so be it.

[danefan]

[/b]

That's the problem. Theory does not meet reality. Palin's daughter being exhibit A. You can talk and preach all you want, but one night in the back seat of a Chevy, can destroy all the beautiful sermons, lectures and brochures.

And can you say for sure that if Palin's daughter had known about birth control then she would not have become pregnant? It's not like kids that get so-called "comprehensive sex education" never get pregnant. Some kids just aren't going to be smart and responsible, no matter what you do.

Our education system beats it into the brains of kids and teens repeatedly to wear their seatbelt...hasn't stopped many fatalities that very well could have been prevented with the seat belts. Kids in school have it repeatedly beaten into their heads to eat their vegetables and eat less junk food - doesn't stop obesity and unhealthy eating habits. Kids are constantly inundated with the facts about smoking on your health, doesn't stop new generations of smokers from cropping up.

You can talk to teens about every method of birth control under the sun. You can make sure every boy knows how to put on a condom. You can give away birth control for free in high schools. You can teach them all about the joys of oral sex. And some teens are going to get pregnant.

You can't save all kids from doing stupid things that could ruin their lives. You just can't. So you might as well go with the most effective sex ed. If that is abstinence-only, then so be it.

So..............you're saying because kids sometimes don't listen that we should just stop telling them things alltogether?

[Appaholic]

And can you say for sure that if Palin's daughter had known about birth control then she would not have become pregnant? It's not like kids that get so-called "comprehensive sex education" never get pregnant. Some kids just aren't going to be smart and responsible, no matter what you do.

Our education system beats it into the brains of kids and teens repeatedly to wear their seatbelt...hasn't stopped many fatalities that very well could have been prevented with the seat belts. Kids in school have it repeatedly beaten into their heads to eat their vegetables and eat less junk food - doesn't stop obesity and unhealthy eating habits. Kids are constantly inundated with the facts about smoking on your health, doesn't stop new generations of smokers from cropping up.

You can talk to teens about every method of birth control under the sun. You can make sure every boy knows how to put on a condom. You can give away birth control for free in high schools. You can teach them all about the joys of oral sex. And some teens are going to get pregnant.

You can't save all kids from doing stupid things that could ruin their lives. You just can't. So you might as well go with the most effective sex ed. If that is abstinence-only, then so be it.

So..............you're saying because kids sometimes don't listen that we should just stop telling them things alltogether?

You know, it's just such a shame that kids don't come equipped, or spawned from, some sort of authoritative, guiding mentor in their formative years so public education wouldn't have to be burdened with this task...maybe a manager or a leader of some sort....a "boss" if you will......we could soften the "boss" nomenclature & call them "parents"........

[danefan]

So..............you're saying because kids sometimes don't listen that we should just stop telling them things alltogether?

You know, it's just such a shame that kids don't come equipped, or spawned from, some sort of authoritative, guiding mentor in their formative years so public education wouldn't have to be burdened with this task...maybe a manager or a leader of some sort....a "boss" if you will......we could soften the "boss" nomenclature & call them "parents"........

Yeah - but we know most parents aren't talking to their kids. That's a given. And we can't force them to do it either.

[JayJ79]

So the results of the study is that abstinence-only education for 6th/7th graders meant that supposedly fewer 8th/9th graders were having sex. (or, I should say, that fewer ADMITTED to having sex).
But when they eventually DO have sex, will they be able to properly have safe sex?

Frankly, with the amount that the media and our culture itself is saturated with sex, I'm not sure sex-ed classes are really going to make much of a difference one way or the other. Basically, it comes down to the morals and mindsets that parents instill in their kids.

[JayJ79]

In a similar note,
I don't think gun safety should be taught to kids at all.

Instead, all kids should be taught to not use guns.

[Appaholic]

You know, it's just such a shame that kids don't come equipped, or spawned from, some sort of authoritative, guiding mentor in their formative years so public education wouldn't have to be burdened with this task...maybe a manager or a leader of some sort....a "boss" if you will......we could soften the "boss" nomenclature & call them "parents"........

Yeah - but we know most parents aren't talking to their kids. That's a given. And we can't force them to do it either.

Yet, in some states, they can hold the parents criminally liable for their children's truancy.....

[Appaholic]

In a similar note,
I don't think gun safety should be taught to kids at all.

Instead, all kids should be taught to not use guns.

Disagree (shocker) unless you are never going to expose your children to guns in your house, or a family member's house, or a friend's house, (hell, even guns on TV), etc......IMO, it's irresponsible NOT to teach children how to handle a gun safely if there is a chance they may encounter one in any environment...

I agree with your premise (teach them not to use guns), but not the method. My father taught me how to safely handle a gun while at the same time teaching me a healthy respect for the power & damage that a gun improperly or irresponsibly handeled can inflict...

[travelinman67]

In a similar note,

all boys should be taught to use their guns responsibly.

Corrected.

[Grizalltheway]

In a similar note,

all boys should be taught to use their guns responsibly.

Corrected.

[youngterrier]

[/b]

That's the problem. Theory does not meet reality. Palin's daughter being exhibit A. You can talk and preach all you want, but one night in the back seat of a Chevy, can destroy all the beautiful sermons, lectures and brochures.

And can you say for sure that if Palin's daughter had known about birth control then she would not have become pregnant? It's not like kids that get so-called "comprehensive sex education" never get pregnant. Some kids just aren't going to be smart and responsible, no matter what you do.

Our education system beats it into the brains of kids and teens repeatedly to wear their seatbelt...hasn't stopped many fatalities that very well could have been prevented with the seat belts. Kids in school have it repeatedly beaten into their heads to eat their vegetables and eat less junk food - doesn't stop obesity and unhealthy eating habits. Kids are constantly inundated with the facts about smoking on your health, doesn't stop new generations of smokers from cropping up.

You can talk to teens about every method of birth control under the sun. You can make sure every boy knows how to put on a condom. You can give away birth control for free in high schools. You can teach them all about the joys of oral sex. And some teens are going to get pregnant.

You can't save all kids from doing stupid things that could ruin their lives. You just can't. So you might as well go with the most effective sex ed. If that is abstinence-only, then so be it.

and if we didn't tell people to put on their seatbelts (though I don't agree with the methods of enforcement) more would be injured. If we didn't spread the message of eating healthy we would have more fat people. If we didn't inform people of the dangers of smoking there would be more smokers and more people with poor health. Your right we can't save everyone, but we can reduce the number of victims, a well educated society is a safe one.

As a teenager I'm offended that people think if I know how to use a condom I'll be more likely to have sex...

[CID1990]

I don't give a flying fvck what ANY study says about this subject, no matter where it comes from.

The government has no business teaching kids about fvcking. Where the fvck are the goddamn parents? Thanks to God or Allah or Buddha or whoever the fvck he is that I'm going to put my kids in a private school where they teach sh!t like math and science and leave talking about those things that will get teenage boys a painful death in my household to me.

[JohnStOnge]

People, all other things aside, the overwhelming majority of adolescents today know about birth control. The overwhelming majority of the kids at the high school I graduated from in 1975 knew about it. Knowing about condoms and availability of condoms is not a problem and hasn't been for like 40+ years at least. When I was in high school there were condoms all over the place. Who the heck doesn't know about condoms or doesn't know where to get one? All you need is some quarters and a mens restroom.

Like Palin's daughter didn't know about birth control including condoms. Please.