Booster Shots

Oddities, musings and news from
the world of health

« Previous Post | Booster Shots Home | Next Post »

Abstinence education as a human-rights violation?

September 24, 2008 |  7:01 am

Newcondoms

Some public health experts believe so. Columbia University researchers studied the impact of abstinence-only sex education programs and concluded that they're ineffective, riddled with inaccuracies, out of touch with young people's lives and, oh, right -- unethical.

In a special issue of Sexuality Research and Social Policy, which is published by the National Sexuality Resource Center, the researchers present their findings. Among the highlights:

* In a comparison of nine abstinence-only programs with 48 comprehensive sex-ed programs, most of the abstinence programs were found not to actually delay initiation of sex. Further, the comprehensive programs were considered generally better at affecting teens' sexuality in positive ways -- that is, they delayed sex or used contraceptives -- than were their counterparts.

* Three widely used abstinence-only curricula suggested condoms don't provide protection against HIV infection. (They do.) The information included out-of-date references, faulty reasoning, incorrect comparisons of risk and other less-than-accurate statements, the researchers found.

* Then there was an analysis of why some states don't accept federal abstinence-only education funds, and a look at how human-rights principles can be used by policy advocates.

The conclusion to the special issue's introduction states:

"Taken as a whole, these articles build a strong scientific and human-rights case against AOE [abstinence-only education]. Together, they find that the very idea of an abstinence-only approach to sexuality education is scientifically and ethically flawed. Such programs reflect a religious and cultural belief system of socially conservative groups who have attained considerable political leverage at both state and federal levels. AOE programs not only fail the usual public-health standard of program efficacy but also actively restrict life-saving information and promote misinformation about scientifically accepted public-health strategies such as condom use."

It's hard to say for sure, but the researchers appear to be opposed to abstinence-only sex ed.

Adds Gil Herdt, the National Sexuality Resource Center's executive director, in a news release: "The piece lacking from all the recent attention paid to teen pregnancy has been real data. This latest research brings that to the table."

-- Tami Dennis

Photo: This teenager was given condoms by a peer counselor at an L.A. high school. Many teenagers are simply taught about abstinence.

Photo credit: Liz O. Baylen / Los Angeles Times


Post a comment
If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate.
Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until they've been approved.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In





Comments


Advertisement


Recent Posts



Archives