{"id":271580,"date":"2010-02-03T07:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-03T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.rhrealitycheck.org\/blog\/2010\/02\/03\/research-shows-abonly-may-help-preteens-avoid-sex-until-they-are-ready"},"modified":"2010-02-03T08:00:35","modified_gmt":"2010-02-03T13:00:35","slug":"ab-only-may-help-preteens-delay-sex","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/271580","title":{"rendered":"Ab-Only May Help PreTeens Delay Sex"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\n\tThis article originally appeared at Advocates for Youth<\/a>.\n\t<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nYou may have seen a few newspaper articles with titles like \u201cAbstinence-only programs might work, study says<\/span><\/a>\u201d in the past couple of days. \u00a0But are newspapers telling the whole story?\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\nThe articles are based on a recent study by respected researchers John B. and Loretta S. Jemmott<\/a>
\nand compare results for young people receiving three kinds of
\nprograms:\u00a0 an \u201cabstinence-only\u201d intervention, designed to help teens
\nwait until they are ready; a \u201ccombined intervention\u201d which included
\ninformation about abstinence as well as contraception and condoms; and
\na safer-sex-only intervention with no information about abstinence.\u00a0 <\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\nThe
\nstudy focused on young African American preteens in an urban area and
\nfound that this new type of abstinence-only program can help some very
\nyoung adolescents (average age 12) delay sexual initiation for up to 24
\nmonths.<\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\nIt
\nis important to note that the study provides no data in support of the
\nfailed abstinence-only-until-marriage programs of the Bush era<\/strong>.\u00a0
\nThe abstinence-only program in this study would not have been eligible
\nfor federal funding during the Bush years because it did not fit the \u201c8
\npoint definition.\u201d The program goal was to help early teens avoid sex
\nuntil they are ready\u2014a totally different objective than the federally
\nfunded abstinence programs already proven ineffective by the long-term
\nMathematica study \u201cwhich showed no impact on teen behavior.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

\nIn the Jemmotts\u2019 own
\nwords: \u201cIt [the abstinence-only intervention] was not designed to meet
\nfederal criteria for abstinence-only programs. For instance, the target
\nbehavior was abstaining from vaginal, anal, and oral intercourse until
\na time later in life when the adolescent is more prepared to handle the
\nconsequences of sex. The intervention did not contain inaccurate
\ninformation, portray sex in a negative light, or use a moralistic tone.
\nThe training and curriculum manual explicitly instructed the
\nfacilitators not to disparage the efficacy of condoms or allow the view
\nthat condoms are ineffective to go uncorrected.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\nPublic Policy Implications:\u00a0Five Points to Keep in Mind<\/em><\/span><\/span><\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\n1. Almost one-quarter of the young people in the study were already sexually active when the study began<\/strong>.\u00a0
\nThis is the problem with the \u201conly\u201d component of any \u201conly-type\u201d
\nprogram.\u00a0 An abstinence-only program provides no information about
\ncondoms and contraception even though, in this case, approximately
\none-quarter of the young people in the intervention already had had
\nsex. <\/p>\n

2. Previous research on virginity pledges (Bearman and
\nBruckner), demonstrated that initial delays in sexual activity wore off
\nin the later teen years. \u00a0Half of all teens are sexually active by the age of 17 and 70 percent of youth have had sexual intercourse by age 19<\/strong>.\u00a0 These teens need information about both abstinence and contraception.<\/span><\/span><\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\n3.
\nThere is good research showing that many comprehensive sex education
\nprograms — programs that provide information about both abstinence and
\ncontraception\/condoms — are effective at helping young people delay
\nsexual initiation as well as<\/em> at using contraception\/condoms
\nwhen they do become sexually active.\u00a0 Thirty years of public health
\nstudies have clearly determined that the provision of information about
\ncondoms and contraception does not increase sexual activity among teens
\nor lower the age of sexual initiation.<\/span><\/span><\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\n4. Given limited
\nresources, shouldn\u2019t we invest tax payer dollars in programs that can
\ndeliver both delay in sexual initiation and increased contraceptive and
\ncondom use by those who are sexually active?\u00a0 <\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\n5.
\nFurther, shouldn\u2019t we respect young people enough to provide them with
\nall of the information they need to take personal responsibility for
\ntheir sexual health?<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\nThe Obama administration is on the
\nright track in funding only science-based programs with evidence of
\neffectiveness.\u00a0 The administration should also consider how scarce
\nresources are best invested and recognize the rights of all young
\npeople to complete, accurate and honest information about their sexual
\nhealth.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This article originally appeared at Advocates for Youth. You may have seen a few newspaper articles with titles like \u201cAbstinence-only programs might work, study says\u201d in the past couple of days. \u00a0But are newspapers telling the whole story?\u00a0\u00a0 The articles are based on a recent study by respected researchers John B. and Loretta S. Jemmott […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5151,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-271580","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271580","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5151"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=271580"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271580\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271580"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271580"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271580"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}