Thou Shalt Abstain

If there's one thing that really gets me going, it's illogicality. (Is a word? Spell check says yes... I'm going to go with it). I consider myself to be a pretty open-minded, logical type of person. In my world, if you're asked to add 1 and 1, the answer is 2. However, it seems that this is not the way the world works. 1 plus 1 does not always equal two where ever social politics are involved. I think I might be getting ahead of myself... let's back it up a bit. 


How would you characterize your sex education program at your school? Mine was what the article, Abstinence-Only and Comprehensive Sex Education and the Initiation of Sexual Activity and Teen Pregnancy by Kohler, Manhart, and Lafferty (2008) would likely classify as comprehensive. Abstinence was explained to be the only way to be 100% sure that you would not get pregnant, or contract an STD. However, we were taught about all the methods of contraception, how to use them, and how effective they were when used properly. We also discussed the various STD's, how they were contracted, and the signs, symptoms, and treatment of each. So, as it turns out, my sex education was not all bad. However, there are some people out there who have experienced abstinence-only programs, where this additional information about contraception and STD's may not have been supplied. My question is this: is there a link between the type of sex education you receive and rates of pregnancy, STD, and engagement in intercourse? This is the topic on the docket for this fine evening. 


Before I ramble on about what I think, let us examine the findings of the study conducted by Kohler et. al. (2008). They surveyed over 1000 students from the ages of 15-19, asking them about the type of sexual education they had received BEFORE their first instance of intercourse. They were asked about experience with intercourse, pregnancy, and STD's. They were also asked to classify what kind of sex education they had received: either none, abstinence-only, or comprehensive. Here is what they found:

• Compared to those who had received no sex education at all, those who received comprehensive sex education were marginally less likely to be engaging in intercourse
• Those who have received comprehensive sex education were significantly less likely to report a teen pregnancy, and have 50% lower risk of pregnancy
• Abstinence-only programs were not significantly related to delaying initiation of sexual activity or in reducing risk of pregnancy or STD contraction 
• Socioeconomic status plays a role in accessibility to sexual education, and those who reported not receiving sex education were likely to be of lower socioeconomic statuses, or members of a visible minority

We have to keep in mind that, with any study that involves self-report, there is going to be a problem. You never know if people are going to tell you the truth, what you think you want to hear, or if they will change their answers to fit with what they believe is expected of them. Also, this is cross-sectional study (meaning that different groups were studied at one point in time), as well as correlational, which makes the establishment of cause and effect difficult (Kohler et. al. 2008). This study also excluded anyone who was not heterosexual, as current sex programs do not address any kind of same-sex contact (more on this another time). However, there is definitely a difference between the two programs, with comprehensive programs looking to be more beneficial to teens in terms of having safe sex. There was a limitation that Kohler et. al (2008) considered that I found extremely insightful, and also should prompt further research in this area: "Evaluations of abstinence-only programs may also be limited by social desirability bias, as participants in these programs may be less likely to report sexual activity before marriage. [...] Given this social desirability bias, the true difference between these programs may be greater than what we observed" (p.351). More research needs to happen to strengthen these findings.

Now, back to my difficulties with illogicality. Kohler et. al. (2008) present statistics on teenage pregnancy, and STD's in the United States, and they have been on the rise. Not only are they on the rise, but they are higher than in other developed countries. Bay-Cheng (2004) and Morris (2000) also reported similar findings. According to Kohler et. al. (2008), in 2008, the budget for abstinence based programs in the United States was 80 million dollars. 80 MILLION DOLLARS. That is an insane amount of money. So you would think that this would assist the United States in lowering their rates of teen pregnancy and STD's. But you would be wrong. In the United States, you can only get government funding for programs that are abstinence based. More specifically, "a sex education program must have as its exclusive purpose "teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity"" (Social Security Act. Section 510, via Kohler et. al. 2008, p.345). This 80 million dollars goes SOLELY to these programs. 

This is where illogicality kicks in: Why would you spend so much money on programs that are clearly not working? WHY? It makes me crazy thinking how counterproductive this is. Somers and Eaves (2002) showed us that sex education at an earlier age did not correlate with the earlier sexual activity. And here, we learn that talking about contraception does not lead teenagers to have sex either. AND abstinence is not related to later start of intercourse. So what the hell are we waiting for? 

We know the answer to this. Say it with me: politics. Not only is it politics, but we have seen how social construction of adolescents affects our programs. However, we have to ask ourselves a couple of important questions: Are we possibly doing more harm than good by failing to properly educate teenagers on methods of contraception, and STD transmission and prevention? I absolutely think we are. It's time to accept that teenagers are going to have sex if you tell them to, or if you tell them not to. We need to realize that, by giving them this knowledge, we are not enabling them to have sex, we are teaching them how to be responsible and safe. This is the way the world is going, and I say, instead of fighting it, we deal with it, and do what we can to ensure that our youth are as safe as we are. We owe them that much.

So what is stopping us? Is it social customs? Pressure from above? Fear of how the parents will react? Let's rest on this last one. What do parents actually think about what their children should be learning? We will look into that next time, so stay tuned. As always, feel free to share your experiences in sex education. What do you wish you would have known about sexual relations before they happened? Keep me posted, I'd love to hear from you. Till next time! 

 References (new) 

Kohler, P.K., Manhardt, L.E., Lafferty, W.E. (2008), Abstinence-Only and Comprehensive Sex Education and the Initiation of Sexual Activity and Teen Pregnancy, Journal of Adolescent Health 42, p.344-351.