Get the Facts
| Home > Get the Facts > Sex Education |
|
Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs are Inaccurate and Ineffective
Abstinence-only-until-marriage programming promotes abstinence from sexual activity without teaching young people basic facts about contraception and other measures that can help them to protect themselves against unintended pregnancy and the transmission of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV/AIDS once they become sexually active.
Since 1996, the federal government has funded an abstinence-only-until marriage grant program that allocates $50 million each year to the states (1). Those that choose to accept these funds must provide $3 in independent matching funds for every $4 in federal monies they receive. In addition, their programs must comply with stringent federal guidelines.
For years in Massachusetts, the Department of Public Health used the federal funds to conduct an effective educational media campaign. But in 2005, then-Governor Mitt Romney redirected these resources – which included $700,000 in state funds – to be used for classroom instruction. Two years later, Governor Deval Patrick joined 17 other states in rejecting the federal funds entirely, responding to new research showing these programs are ineffective and medically inaccurate as well as new federal guidelines that eliminated state flexibility to tailor their programs.
Stringent Federal Guidelines Dey State Flexibility, Prevent Effective Programs
Federal guidelines outline eight criteria to be used to determine what qualifies as an abstinence-only-until-marriage program eligible for federal funds (see box). Originally, a state did not have to comply with every element of the eight-point definition, but their program could not contradict it (2). For a decade, this limited flexibility allowed states to pick and choose among the elements in the definition of abstinence-until-marriage programs, thus allowing them to use the funds in more locally and educationally appropriate ways.
In August 2006, federal guidelines changed to require states seeking federal funds to comply with all eight elements of the stringent definition of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs (3). A state was also required to provide assurances that it was taking measures to ensure that federally funded programs "do not promote contraception and/or condom use." This contradicts research showing that sex and HIV education programs that discuss both abstinence and contraception delay the onset of sex, reduce the frequency of sex, and increase contraceptive use (4).
Research Shows Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Programs Were Inaccurate and Ineffective
According to a 2005 report by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, more than 80% of abstinence-only-until-marriage programming used by federal grantees contained false or misleading information (6). Moreover, a federally funded evaluation of four of these programs issued in 2007 showed that young people who participated in abstinence-only-until-marriage programs did not engage in less-risky sexual behavior. Specifically, those enrolled in these programs were no more likely than their non-enrolled peers to delay sexual initiation, have fewer sexual partners, or abstain from sex (7).
According to Title V of the Social Security Act, an abstinence-only-until-marriage program:
B) teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
C) teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
D) teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;
E) teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects;
F) teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child's parents, and society;
G) teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances; and
H) teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.
Notes
1.The 1996 federal welfare reform law made abstinence-only grants available to the states under Title V of the Social Security Act, section 501.
2.Dailard, Cynthia, "Abstinence Promotion and Teen Family Planning: The Misguided Drive for Equal Funding," Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, Guttmacher Institute, Washington, DC: February 2002.
3. "Each element of A through H should be meaningfully represented in all grantee's federally funded abstinence education programs and curricula." The program was also expanded to encompass unmarried adults, aged 19 to 29, for whom abstinence-only-until-marriage is especially inappropriate given that more than 90% of people ages 20 to 29 have had sexual intercourse. Dailard, Cynthia, "New Bush Administration Policy Promotes Abstinence Until Marriage Among People in their 20s," Guttmacher Policy Review, Guttmacher Institute, Washington, DC: 2006."
4.Kirby, Douglas, Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, The National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, Washington, DC: 2001.
5. Boonstra, Heather D., "Sex Education: Another Big Step Forward–And a Step Back," Guttmacher Policy Review, Guttmacher Institute, Washington, DC: 2010.
6.U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform. The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs, Prepared for Rep. Henry A. Waxman. Washington, DC: 2004.
7.Mathematica Policy Research, Impacts of Four Title V, Section 510 Abstinence Education Programs Final Report, Princeton, NJ: 2007; submitted to U.S. Dept. Health & Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
JOIN US: