It is nothing if not controversial. Those who believe abstinence-only sex education is the way to reduce teen sexual activity, pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease have taken tons of criticism from those who believe that teens need more information in order to protect themselves. But a new study suggests that abstinence-only classes may be working, at least with younger students.
The study, published in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, found that about two-thirds of sixth- and seventh-graders who took an abstinence-only program resisted having sex within the next two years. In contrast, about half of the kids who took classes where more information about contraception was given became sexually active during that time period.
The Washington Post calls the research a "landmark study that could have major implications for U.S. efforts to protect young people against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases."
"I think we've written off abstinence-only education without looking closely at the nature of the evidence," John B. Jemmott III, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania who led the federally funded study, told the Post. "Our study shows this could be one approach that could be used."
Abstinence-only programs emphasize the need to avoid sex until marriage in order to prevent pregnancy or STDs. Other sex education programs provide some information on abstinence, but also add information about condom use and birth control.
More from the story:
"The Obama administration eliminated more than $170 million in annual federal funding targeted at abstinence programs after a series of reports concluded that the approach was ineffective. Instead, the White House is launching a $114 million pregnancy prevention initiative that will fund only programs that have been shown scientifically to work -- a program the administration on Monday proposed expanding to $183 million.
"This new study is game-changing," said Sarah Brown, who leads the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. "For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex."
"The study is the first to evaluate an abstinence program using a carefully designed approach comparing it with several alternative strategies and following subjects for an extended period of time, considered the kind of study that produces the highest level of scientific evidence."
From The New York Times:
The study differed from traditional programs that have lost federal and state support in recent years. The classes did not preach saving sex until marriage or disparage condom use. Instead, they involved assignments aimed at helping sixth and seventh graders see the drawbacks to sexual activity at their age.
One of the important aspect of the study is that it only studies the effect of abstinence-only programs on 12- and 13-year-olds. More research is needed to see if the effects last through the mid- and late-teen years.
From the Los Angeles Times:
Bill Albert, chief program officer at the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group based in Washington, noted that this is only one study in one region. It "should not be interpreted as a signal that abstinence-only education works at all times and under all circumstances. That doesn't even pass the common-sense test."
"In an editorial accompanying the report, journal editor Dr. Frederick P. Rivara of the University of Washington and Dr. Alain Joffe of Johns Hopkins University argued that "no public policy should be based on the results of one study, nor should policymakers selectively use scientific literature to formulate a policy that meets preconceived ideologies."
Jemmott agreed in a statement, saying that other types of students must be studied as well: "Policy should not be based on just one study, but an accumulation of empirical findings from several well-designed, well-executed studies."
The study was conducted among 662 African American sixth- and seventh-graders in four low-income schools in the northeastern United States. The students were randomized into four groups.
One received an eight-hour abstinence-only class focusing on the risks of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. It was based on principles shown to be effective in reducing transmission of sexually transmitted diseases and did not use a moralistic tone or portray sex in a negative light.
A second group received an eight-hour safe-sex class. The third group received a comprehensive eight- or 12-hour class emphasizing both aspects. The control group received education only about healthy living.
Over the two years after taking the classes, 48.5% of those in the control group reported sexual activity, compared with 33.5% of those in the abstinence-only group. About 52% of those taught only safe sex reported sexual activity, and about 42% of those in the comprehensive class made a similar report.
The Washington Post story:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR2010020102628.html?hpid=topnews
The New York Times brief:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/education/02brfs-STUDYFINDSBE_BRF.html
The Los Angeles Times story:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-sci-sex-ed2-2010feb02,0,1922434.story