Abstinence education found useless

[flashl]

Programs that focus exclusively on abstinence have not been shown to affect teenager sexual behavior, although they are eligible for tens of millions of dollars in federal grants, according to a study released by a nonpartisan group that seeks to reduce teen pregnancies.

"At present there does not exist any strong evidence that any abstinence program delays the initiation of sex, hastens the return to abstinence or reduces the number of sexual partners" among teenagers, the study concluded.

The report, which was based on a review of research into teen sexual behavior, was being released Wednesday by the nonpartisan National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.

Read Entire Story

[PDJane]

1. Wow. Amazing.

Talk about a magnificent grasp of the obvious.

Can you name one thing that your kids won't do, at least once, if you tell them not to?

[rodeodance]

2. NO, BUT THE REPUGS WILL CONTINUE TO DELUDE THEMSELVES ON OUR DIME!

[leftchick]

7. it isn't just the repugs: 'Now the Democrats Are Funding Abstinence?'

yet another sellout from the useless party.....

http://www.alternet.org/sex/53700/

Now the Democrats Are Funding Abstinence?

By James Wagoner, TomPaine.com. Posted June 11, 2007.

In the interest of "avoiding controversy," Democratic House Appropriations Chair David Obey has become one of the largest funders of the famous vast right-wing conspiracy, adding $140 million for abstinence education.

Back in November of 2006, after the Democrats won control of the House, what kind of odds do you think you would have gotten on the following scenario: With the Democrats in control, the appropriations cycle begins and the first big policy step the Democrats take on domestic reproductive health is to push through a 30 percent increase in abstinence-only-until-marriage programs that prohibit information about condoms and birth control. Oh, and by the way, that increase (to $140 million) is larger than any put forward in the last three years of the Republican-led Congress.

"Huh?" you might ask.

Now, let me make the scenario even better -- or worse. What if you were told that just six weeks before the Appropriations Committee met, a major 10-year evaluation that Congress itself had mandated was released showing that abstinence-only programs had no impact on teen behavior? On top of that, what if you were told that the Society of Adolescent Medicine had released a report in 2006 stating that abstinence-only-programs "threaten fundamental human rights to health, information and life?"

And wait, there's more. When Democrat Henry Waxman was the ranking minority member on government oversight back in 2004, his staff did a report on the content of abstinence-only programs that showed over 80 percent of the programs contained "false or misleading information." All the way back in 2000, the Institute of Medicine, the nation's leading authority on public health, had called for the termination of abstinence-only programs because they represent "poor fiscal and public health policy."

<snip>


Lawmakers say the olive branch extended to Republicans increases the likelihood that the bill will pass the House with a veto-proof majority. It also sends a strong signal that Appropriations Chairman David R. Obey, D-Wis., will avoid controversial social policy changes this year in the interest of moving bills.

[flashl]

3. Usually after findings of this type, they are ready to announce their NEW and IMPROVED plan. n/t

[Quantess]

4. Abstinence education has worked throughout the centuries.

What are you talking about?!
:sarcasm: :evilgrin:

[sutz12]

5. But I thought it increased the incidence of oral sex?...sounds pretty useful to me

:evilgrin:

[aquart]

6. Shocked. Shocked. How can this be?

Besides, nothing that makes a fortune for right wing sycophants can truly be called "useless." "Dangerous," maybe. "Corrupt," maybe. "Depraved, maybe." Some days even "treasonous." But never "useless."