Abstinence-pledging teens equally likely to have pre-marital sex

rabbitt

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
Premarital Abstinence Pledges Ineffective, Study Finds
Teenagers Who Make Such Promises Are Just as Likely to Have Sex, and Less Likely to Use Protection, the Data Indicate

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 29, 2008; Page A02

Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.

The new analysis of data from a large federal survey found that more than half of youths became sexually active before marriage regardless of whether they had taken a "virginity pledge," but that the percentage who took precautions against pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases was 10 points lower for pledgers than for non-pledgers.

"Taking a pledge doesn't seem to make any difference at all in any sexual behavior," said Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, whose report appears in the January issue of the journal Pediatrics. "But it does seem to make a difference in condom use and other forms of birth control that is quite striking."

The study is the latest in a series that have raised questions about programs that focus on encouraging abstinence until marriage, including those that specifically ask students to publicly declare their intention to remain virgins. The new analysis, however, goes beyond earlier analyses by focusing on teens who had similar values about sex and other issues before they took a virginity pledge.
ad_icon

"Previous studies would compare a mixture of apples and oranges," Rosenbaum said. "I tried to pull out the apples and compare only the apples to other apples."

The findings are reigniting the debate about the effectiveness of abstinence-focused sexual education just as Congress and the new Obama administration are about to reconsider the more than $176 million in annual funding for such programs.

"This study again raises the issue of why the federal government is continuing to invest in abstinence-only programs," said Sarah Brown of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. "What have we gained if we only encourage young people to delay sex until they are older, but then when they do become sexually active -- and most do well before marriage -- they don't protect themselves or their partners?"

James Wagoner of the advocacy group Advocates for Youth agreed: "The Democratic Congress needs to get its head out of the sand and get real about sex education in America."

Proponents of such programs, however, dismissed the study as flawed and argued that programs that focus on abstinence go much further than simply asking youths to make a one-time promise to remain virgins.

"It is remarkable that an author who employs rigorous research methodology would then compromise those standards by making wild, ideologically tainted and inaccurate analysis regarding the content of abstinence education programs," said Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association.

Rosenbaum analyzed data collected by the federal government's National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which gathered detailed information from a representative sample of about 11,000 students in grades seven through 12 in 1995, 1996 and 2001.

Although researchers have analyzed data from that survey before to examine abstinence education programs, the new study is the first to use a more stringent method to account for other factors that could influence the teens' behavior, such as their attitudes about sex before they took the pledge.

Rosenbaum focused on about 3,400 students who had not had sex or taken a virginity pledge in 1995. She compared 289 students who were 17 years old on average in 1996, when they took a virginity pledge, with 645 who did not take a pledge but were otherwise similar. She based that judgment on about 100 variables, including their attitudes and their parents' attitudes about sex and their perception of their friends' attitudes about sex and birth control.

"This study came about because somebody who decides to take a virginity pledge tends to be different from the average American teenager. The pledgers tend to be more religious. They tend to be more conservative. They tend to be less positive about sex. There are some striking differences," Rosenbaum said. "So comparing pledgers to all non-pledgers doesn't make a lot of sense."

By 2001, Rosenbaum found, 82 percent of those who had taken a pledge had retracted their promises, and there was no significant difference in the proportion of students in both groups who had engaged in any type of sexual activity, including giving or receiving oral sex, vaginal intercourse, the age at which they first had sex, or their number of sexual partners. More than half of both groups had engaged in various types of sexual activity, had an average of about three sexual partners and had had sex for the first time by age 21 even if they were unmarried.

"It seems that pledgers aren't really internalizing the pledge," Rosenbaum said. "Participating in a program doesn't appear to be motivating them to change their behavior. It seems like abstinence has to come from an individual conviction rather than participating in a program."

While there was no difference in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases in the two groups, the percentage of students who reported condom use was about 10 points lower for those who had taken the pledge, and they were about 6 percentage points less likely to use any form of contraception. For example, about 24 percent of those who had taken a pledge said they always used a condom, compared with about 34 percent of those who had not.

Rosenbaum attributed the difference to what youths learn about condoms in abstinence-focused programs.

"There's been a lot of work that has found that teenagers who take part in abstinence-only education have more negative views about condoms," she said. "They tend not to give accurate information about condoms and birth control."

But Huber disputed that charge.

"Abstinence education programs provide accurate information on the level of protection offered through the typical use of condoms and contraception," she said. "Students understand that while condoms may reduce the risk of infection and/or pregnancy, they do not remove the risk."

Link

If things get too heated, mods may have to move this to the Vs. forum.

Thoughts?
 
Abstinence education has long been shown to be ineffective, so no surprise here. I have no problems with teach abstinence along side sex ed though. It can't hurt anything. Abstinence only, however, is a stupid idea.
 
[quote name='bardockkun']Only more likely to get nailed in the pooper instead if they pledge abstinence...[/quote]

Sad, but true! I knew a few girls who didn't count that as sex in high school.
 
[quote name='squid']Sad, but true! I knew a few girls who didn't count that as sex in high school.[/quote]
Also oral sex. Let's not forget that from school.
 
Well, conspicuously pledging devotion to abstinence is a bit pretentious, and those who are pretentious are likely to be hypocrites as well.
 
I saw this on the Today Show...AWESOME. It's good to know that abstinent teens are having bumbling, irresponsible sex. A new generation of Abstinent-pledging Jonas's shall be born!
 
Wow. Teens who pledge not to have sex are likely to have sex anyway. Is this really news to anyone except the religiously conservative? This is forehead-slapping "DUH" territory. #-oThey're teens. They're got hormones floating off them. Again, duh.:wall::nottalking:
 
Attempts to stop people, especially teens, from fucking is pushed forth by people who haven't given much of a thought as to how they ended up on this planet in the first place.
 
No fucking........









...shit.

:)

Sex is good, our bodies want sex. The old people say that kids have sex too early these days, it's really nothing new.
 
82 percent of those who pledge abstinence retract it or disregard it. That just goes to show how well forcing your religion down you child's throat works.
 
...It took them this long to write an article on this? Years back they did a survey in some Southern state, Kentucky?, or something, and they found pretty much the same results. If you don't teach them about sex, what sick things will these kids be up to?
 
^ Florida. They found that the students were severely misinformed about what could stop people from becoming pregnant; among students' ideas were drinking a capful of bleach (!), smoking a joint, or drinking Mountain Dew.

But let's be honest about all abstinence-only evaluation studies: do you suddenly think that empirical, real-world evidence that these programs don't work will convince those who support those policies, given that they based this idea not upon evidence, but upon religious conviction and ideology?
 
bread's done
Back
Top