Why Abstinence-Only Sex Education Fails

Lately, I've seen a lot of articles and editorials out there in web land (and otherwise) that argue in favor of abstinence-only sex education, but they all seem to have one thing in common: they're written by people who don't know what's really going on with these programs.

They go something like this: teen sex is a bad idea, here are the reasons why, therefore abstinence-only education in our schools is the best choice.

So let me start off, then, by saying that I agree that teen sex is a bad idea. Sex is a risky business from just about any angle that you look at it and something that requires a hell of a lot of responsibility. I don't think most teenagers really have the maturity to handle the emotional ramifications of sex or the world experience necessary to be appropriately aware of STI risk, and I'm quite sure that our teenage years are a very bad time to deal with pregnancy and childbirth. All in all, I would advise any teenager to wait on the whole sex thing until adulthood -- the risk just isn't worth the reward.

But I'm not foolish enough to think that teenagers are so malleable and easily persuaded that you can throw a few hours of abstinence propaganda at them (at a time when they've probably already made up their minds about whether or not they're going to have sex) and expect it to magically stick. These are young people with their own unique minds, situations, social pressures, and upbringings, all of which have much more influence on their decisions than any little educational program ever could.

Do I believe in arguing the case for abstinence? Absolutely! There's no reason comprehensive sex education programs can't include making a case for abstinence as the only 100% method of preventing pregnancy and STIs. And in my experience, I have yet to find a comprehensive program or any comprehensive materials that fail to do exactly this.

And to those who try to argue that birth control education somehow "encourages" teens to have sex, know this: one of the single greatest factors in my decision to delay sex until adulthood was the knowledge I received through a Planned Parenthood presentation at my high school. Seeing how much responsibility and care proper birth control use requires, and learning that risk of pregnancy can never be fully eliminated, I decided not to take the chance.

However, my desire to eliminate abstinence-only programs is not merely founded in the idea that comprehensive sex ed is better: Itruly believe that abstinence-only sex education makes the problems of teen sex worse.

What people need to realize about these programs, first and foremost, is that they tell lies to teenagers. When they're not pontificating about the nonexistent link between abortion and breast cancer, they're citing made-up statistics about how condoms supposedly nearly always break or intentionally confusing birth control with abortion. Kids who learn from these programs are not getting information about how to reduce their risk of pregnancy and STDS.

Third, these programs do not promote the idea of abstinence until adulthood: they promote a standard of abstinence until marriage. Now, I fully respect people's right to hold a religious belief about keeping sex within the confines of Christian marriage, but religious initiatives must be kept out of state policy as a matter of constitutional law. The fact that this one keeps slipping by should be bothering more people than it does.

(I could also point out that these programs are shockingly heteronormative and don't give young gay and lesbian teens any information whatsoever about safer sex practices and risks -- or indeed, even acknowledge the existence of non-straight teens in their audience -- but considering we're dealing with a religious agenda anyway, there doesn't seem to be much point. )

Now, I realize that the argument against teaching teens safer-sex practices goes something like this: if we teach them how to protect themselves during, they'll feel like it's okay to have it, so we have to make sure they think that sex must always be risky and unhealthy.

Hang on. Did we just admit that we're trying to scare these young adults out of having sex? By lying and withholding factual information, information they'll need to have at some point in their lives? We don't see anything wrong with that?

Well, even if it wasn't wrong on its own, it doesn't work, either. Over and over again, statistics have shown that abstinence-only education is doing nothing to reduce teen sex rates. However, the recent popularity of these programs (and the government's runaway funding of them) has coincided with the first rise in teen pregnancy rates in decades.

The lesson? Teens are *gasp* capable of independent thought and will decide for themselves if they're going to have sex. It's only up to us to decide if they have access to the scientific information and supplies needed to reduce the risks associated with it.

Unless, of course, you feel that unwanted pregnancy and STDs (including deadly ones) are a just punishment for sexually active teens. These days, I'm becoming more and more convinced that that's exactly what the abstinence-only movement is all about.