Pro-Life Action League

. . . because action speaks louder than words.

League history, NOW v. Scheidler, Action News, Joe Scheidler, League staff

Q & A on abortion, the unborn child, where we stand on the issues and more

Helping abortion-bound women choose life for their babies

Unmasking the truth about abortion in the public square

Our youth outreach, raising up a new generation of pro-life leaders

Abortion industry converts tell the inside story

News and commentary from the Pro-Life Action League

News and commentary from the Pro-Life Action League

Home Hotline Blog Article

Abstinence Education Works

Posted by John Jansen (February 5, 2010 at 1:50 pm)

duhIf you asked 100 people at random if they believed abstinence education is effective, most of them would probably say no.

Most would probably say that teaching abstinence is “unrealistic”, that it doesn’t work, and that schools should instead be teaching so-called “comprehensive” sex education.

A big part of the reason why so many people believe abstinence education is ineffective is because its opponents—not the least of which are the major players in the abortion industry and other pro-abortion choice organizations—have been relentlessly tub-thumping for years trying to convince people that it is so, such that it’s now one of those things that “everybody knows”.

And most mainstream media outlets have carried water for them every step of the way.

So ingrained in popular consciousness is this idea that when the Washington Post reported on a “landmark” study released Monday that demonstrated remarkable comparative effectiveness of abstinence education vs. so-called “comprehensive” sex education, they couldn’t bring themselves to fully admit what the research showed.

The study, led by Dr. John Jemmott of the University of Pennsylvania, involved 662 black students in four urban public middle schools.  It revealed that about 33% of students who went through an abstinence program had sex within 2 years, as opposed to 52% who were only taught only “safe sex”.

“Abstinence-only programs might work, study says,” read the headline. “The findings are the first clear evidence that an abstinence program could work,” read one sentence.

Might work”? “Could work”?

This study shows abstinence education does work.  And—again, contra the WaPo article—this is by no means “the first clear evidence” thereof.

Still, it’s greatly encouraging that this particular study is receiving so much attention, and it certainly calls into question the Obama administration’s decision to cut more than $170 in federal funding for abstinence education programs.

It’s also interesting to note the reaction of the so-called “Comprehensive” Sex Education establishment to the study.

The WaPo article quotes James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth, whose response was essentially a shrug: “There is no data in this study to support the ‘abstain until marriage’ programs, which research proved ineffective during the Bush administration.”

What damning “research” is Wagoner referring to?

I had a suspicion it was the April 2007 study conducted by Mathematica Policy Research [PDF], which, since its release, has often been cited by opponents of abstinence education programs as the definitive evidence of their ineffectiveness.

And a check of the Advocates for Youth website confirmed my hunch. Attempting to distinguish between the program studied in the Jemmott research and Bush-era abstinence programs, AfY notes:

The program goal was to help early teens avoid sex until they are ready—a totally different objective than the federally funded abstinence programs already proven ineffective by the long-term Mathematica study “which showed no impact on teen behavior”.

The Mathematica study contains some extraordinary flaws that were pointed out within days of its release.

Among other things, it studied children as young as 3rd grade—not exactly the average age for abstinence programs and/or sexual activity—and researched only four (4) programs—a ridiculously small sample of the several hundred federally funded abstinence education programs.

Bearing this information in mind, Wagoner’s comments are nonsensical.

With any luck, though, maybe the buzz surrounding the Jemmott study will prompt the mainstream media to take a new look at abstinence education—and maybe even start asking questions about the Mathematica study that they should have asked three years ago.

If they did, they might discover that the groups that have been championing it and other dubious studies are part of a movement that simply cannot be trusted to have our children’s best interests at heart.

[Back to Top]
Posted in Abstinence, The Culture War, Youth Outreach. Follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

5 Responses to “Abstinence Education Works”

Note: Visitor comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the Pro-Life Action League.

  1. Mike McPheters says:

    Sometimes it takes awhile to be disseminated, but the truth always finds a way of becoming known! Thanks for forwarding this. I plan to pass it along to other pro-life advocates and even some others who should know this information. Thanks for sharing.

    Posted February 5, 2010 at 6:45 pm
  2. IRENE STRIGO says:

    ABSTINENCE IS WHAT OUR PARENTS TAUGHT US. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY WERE RIGHT. CHILDREN IN JUNIOR HIGH ARE ALREADY TRAUMATIZED AND CORRUPTED BY THE ”HAVE SEX OR YOU ARE A FREAK” ATTITUDE IN SCHOOL. ADULTS TURN A BLIND EYE OR THROW UP THEIR HANDS. PARENTS DEAL WITH IT WTIH THE PILL OR AN ABORTION.

    I DO NOT BLAME THE KIDS. THEY RUN AMOCK IN A WORLD WHERE EVERY FORM OF MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT IDOLIZES SEX. TIME FOR US TO WAKE UP. JESUS IS ASKING US TO SAVE OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN.

    Posted February 5, 2010 at 8:45 pm
  3. Sabrina says:

    It’s quite frustrating to see how blinded the general public is to the blatant truth, but it just goes to show that there really is a supernatural force behind this evil, one that can only be defeated by fasting and prayer as our Lord said…

    Posted February 6, 2010 at 3:40 am
  4. Kathi says:

    I find it so interesting that a study had to be done to prove, (yet again) something that Grandma would of said all along. We have come so far haven’t we?

    Posted February 7, 2010 at 11:10 pm
  5. Renee says:

    Well, the stats on just who is having sex look good. But what are the stats on pregnancies and STD’s? So what if less are having sex if they have a higher rate of permanent negative consequences? Such a complex issue needs to be looked at from the perspective of more than just one general statistic. The sample size is quite small as well. The results of a scientific study need to be able to be replicated in a wider application. The wider applications that have come out recently indicate that teen pregnancy, after a downward trend, are going back up, correlating with the popularity of abstinence only education.

    Posted February 12, 2010 at 9:27 pm

Leave a Reply to this Hotline Entry

We welcome a free and open exchange of ideas on the Pro-Life Hotline, from all points of view, but we request that you restrict your remarks to the topic(s) presented in the entry above.

To ensure constructive dialog, the following will not be tolerated:

You may use HTML code to style your comments.