#121157 - 04/16/07 07:39 AM
Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
|
Today, I ain't for sale. Check back tomorrow.
Registered: 08/10/00
Posts: 13242
Loc: Ca., Id, Wa., Or. or somewhere...
|
BEIJING, April 16 (Xinhuanet) -- Sex-education programs that focus on teaching teens to abstain from sex until marriage seem to not work well, according to a study ordered by the U.S. Congress earlier and quoted by media Monday.
The study found that students who took part in sexual abstinence programs were just as likely to have sex as those who did not.
A survey of more than 2,000 teenagers carried out by a research company on behalf of the Congress found that half of the sample given abstinence-only education displayed exactly the same predilection for sex as those who had received conventional sex education in which contraception was discussed.
"For both the program and control group youth, the reported mean age at first intercourse was identical, 14.9 years," said the survey.
"Over the last 12 months, 23 percent of both groups reported having had sex and always using a condom; 17 percent of both groups reported having had sex and only sometimes using a condom; and 4 percent of both groups reported having had sex and never using a condom," the survey wrote.
Even though the study found the programs had no effect on children's sexual habits later on, it stressed that the programs did not result in an increase in the rate of unprotected sex. Critics have suggested that the sex abstinence programs could result in children engaging in unprotected sex in larger numbers.
Despite critics saying these programs are a waste of money, which could be directed to other more effective programs, the U.S. federal government spends 176 million U.S. dollars on them annually.
This survey has been a central plank of President George Bush's social policy: to stop teenagers having sex. More than 1 billion of federal money has been spent on promoting abstinence since 1998.
_________________________
Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.
George Bernard Shaw
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121170 - 04/16/07 03:03 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: Neil D]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Over $1B on a program that is a central plank of GWB's social policy and doesn't work...
I predict that the Bush administration will (a) ignore the study, and (b) do something to the people who did/requested the study.
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121172 - 04/16/07 03:47 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: Neil D]
|
Administrator of Foro Adventista
Registered: 02/02/02
Posts: 16996
Loc: Rio Grande Valley, Texas
|
BEIJING? We couldn't find a domestic source for this story? Studies have shown the "Love Waits" program the Southern Baptists delays the first sexual encounter by two or three years and that those who have been in the program have less sexual partners before they marry than others. The results I saw from The Kaiser Family Foundation indicate the median age for boys first sexual encounter is 16.9 years and for girls is 17.4. I am not sure where Beijing got 14.9 from. Even if both groups are starting sex at the same age, the good news is that more are waiting longer before they start. Certainly abstinence education needs to encompass the emotional issues of having sex prior to marriage and the impact it has on teenage break-ups. Another interesting study would be to find out if those that have sex before marriage are more likely to commit adultery during marriage. The failure of the public school program (if indeed this story isn't just anti-American, communist propaganda) most likely lies with the way the program is taught. If teachers are teaching the subject because they are forced to, and don't really believe it realistic, the results are likely to show that. It is like when my biology teacher taught us evolution and he began by telling us he didn't believe it himself but had to teach it according to law. Well, if the teacher doesn't even believe it, how many kids will? This survey has been a central plank of President George Bush's social policy: to stop teenagers having sex. This makes one wonder if English is the second language of the article's author. How can the survey be the central plank of the policy? The survey is only a means of measurement. That is like saying a scale is a central part of my weight-loss diet.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121177 - 04/16/07 04:36 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: Shane]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Since I know you like Fox News... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265940,00.htmlWASHINGTON — Students who participated in sexual abstinence programs were just as likely to have sex within a few years as those who did not, according to a long-awaited study mandated by Congress.
Also, those who attended the abstinence classes reported having similar numbers of sexual partners as those who did not attend the classes, and they first had sex at about the same age as their control group counterparts -- 14 years and nine months, according to Mathematica Policy Research Inc.
The federal government now spends about $176 million annually on abstinence-until-marriage education. Critics have repeatedly said they don't believe the programs are working, and the study will give them reinforcement.
However, Bush administration officials cautioned against drawing sweeping conclusions from the study. They said the four programs reviewed -- among several hundred across the nation -- were some of the very first established after Congress overhauled the nation's welfare laws in 1996.
Officials said one lesson they learned from the study is that the abstinence message should be reinforced in subsequent years to truly affect behavior.
Anybody else find that 14-years-and-nine-months number surprising? /Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121178 - 04/16/07 04:41 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: bevin]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
The "Love Waits" studies are in the Wikipedia
I didn't look closely - but there were two things that were apparent.
(a) It was NOT taking the program that was correlated with the delay, it was taking the pledge - in other words, the sample is biased and causality was not established
(b) The evidence suggested that, while intercourse was delayed, other highly sexual activity was not
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121187 - 04/16/07 06:05 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: bevin]
|
Registered: 04/19/05
Posts: 592
Loc: Texas
|
I think this is another case of getting mixed messages. What good will it do to tell these kids don't have sex before marriage, when they will then go home to their mom/dad's house and their live-in boy/girl friend? If they grow up with immorality then it is hard to teach them about moral things. It isn't necessarily the school's fault but a whole break down of society at large.
_________________________
For what will a man be profited, if he gains the whole world, and forfeits his soul? Mat. 16:26
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121195 - 04/16/07 07:01 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: bevin]
|
Administrator of Foro Adventista
Registered: 02/02/02
Posts: 16996
Loc: Rio Grande Valley, Texas
|
I know you like Fox News.. The link goes to an AP story published on FOXNews' website. And yes, the AP story was more objective than the communist news service. "I really do think it's a two-part story. First, there is no evidence that the programs increased the rate of sexual abstinence," said Chris Trenholm, a senior researcher at Mathematica who oversaw the study. "However, the second part of the story that I think is equally important is that we find no evidence that the programs increased the rate of unprotected sex." Big discrepancies between this study and that done by the Kaiser Family Foundation only two years ago. Both organizations are non-partisan and reputable. Well, we know the liberal answer is just to throw more money at the problem. Right? If it isn't working, spend more money. Unless we want 14 year olds having sex. Then, by all means, abandon the program.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121199 - 04/16/07 07:43 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: Shane]
|
Registered: 07/03/02
Posts: 1294
Loc: NSW Australia
|
Well, we know the liberal answer is just to throw more money at the problem. Right? If it isn't working, spend more money.
Remind me again, Shane, who wants to throw more money at the debacle that is Iraq?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121210 - 04/16/07 08:43 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: Planey]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Actually, in this case, it is the Bush Administration - that bastion of liberalism - that wants to throw money at the program...
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#121221 - 04/16/07 09:30 PM
Re: Sex-education programs for U.S. teens not working?
[Re: Planey]
|
Administrator of Foro Adventista
Registered: 02/02/02
Posts: 16996
Loc: Rio Grande Valley, Texas
|
Iraq is completely off topic. Funding a war has nothing to do with funding sex education. To bring it up only shows the anti-Bush bias of the poster. It is like Rush Limbaugh that uses completely unrelated issues to bash Clinton. What is driving sex among teenagers is the sex-saturated entertainment industry and the secularization of society. We cannot expect any public school program to have much of an impact on that. The FCC needs to crack down more on what they allow to be transmitted via radio and satellites. While that is censorship, it is not unconstitutional. The FCC can prohibit certain things (like cigarette advertising) on the radio and television that is still allowed in print media form. Freedom of speech is not protected to the same extent in broadcast media as it is in print media and satellite signals are transmitted on the people's right-of-way just like the streets we drive on. The FCC has the authority to censor these communications and have a larger impact than teaching abstinence in public schools. H.R. 3717, the ‘Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2004 Now, I have a few observations followed by a question. The Super Bowl fiasco was a matter of seconds. But just two days ago, Tuesday, here in Washington, D. C., cable and satellite providers carried 675 hours of pornography mostly on pay per view channels. Yes, a total of 675 hours of filth in one 24 hour period-and at all hours of the day. Now, here's the point. Cable and satellite use the public satellite orbital positions licensed by the FCC. They use microwave frequencies licensed by the FCC and owned by the people and the right of ways on streets also owned by the people. Cable and satellite television could not function without the public's right of ways or the public's spectrum...
No one sitting in this room can tell me it is in the public interest for cable and satellite providers to use the public spectrum and right of ways to pipe indecent and obscene programming into America's living rooms at all hours of the day without any constraints or limitations. But that is what is happening, day after day.
How to fix this moral decay? Empower the FCC; enact legislation; have an amendment to the Constitution if necessary. You are the lawmakers. You can do it...
I've talked with dozens of church clergy, and they would step to this microphone and tell you that the number one family counseling problem is pornography on cable, satellite and the Internet.
If you need voters' names on petitions to do something about this pervasive evil, just tell me how many millions. It will be done.
Please don't say that pornography is okay because it is scrambled. In fact, the people in the home who know how to use a remote control best are the kids, and you only need a remote control to click on a pay per view channel to unscramble those signals.
Finally, the proceeding of Multicast Must Carry for the public's digital TV licenses is over three years old at the FCC. It's the one thing necessary for the DTV transition to work, and it hasn't happened yet. The cable and satellite providers say they have no spectrum for the additional program streams that would provide companies like mine with the ability to offer more family friendly programming, minority oriented programming and faith based programming. Tell cable and satellite to get the pornography off. They've got room for our multicast channels.
The majority of American people have values and morals. The majority of America people do not want what they own to be used for pornography in any way.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|

SEARCH OUR SITE
|
|
This full membership income helps pay for hosting, advertising, domain names, software support etc etc
|
|
|
54 registered (aldona, Beryl, Bravus, bygjymbo, CoAspen, darlene, Denise, dgrimm60, Doug, fccool, forgie, gladmel, Gladussee, Gregory Matthews, Jerry D Thomas, Joel, John317, Kevin H, Kountzer, LifeHiscost, Lineman, Liz, LynnDel, melvin mccarty, Nan, Neil D, Nightingale, Norman, olger, pkrause, Raphael, Redwood, Robert, Taylor, Tero, The7thdayrest, Vera, 17 invisible),
432
Guests and
184
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Registered: 07/14/01
Posts: 15431
|
|
|