United Press International - December 2, 2004
Christian Bourge, UPI Congressional and Policy Correspondent

Ultimately the report raises questions not only about what these programs hope to accomplish in the real world, but also about what is driving Bush White House policies on the matter.

President Bush has embraced abstinence-based sex education for public school children as a means of preventing teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease by more than doubling federal spending on such programs since taking office in 2001 to nearly $170 million in 2005.

Several million school-age children between 9 and 18 years old have participated in more than 100 federal abstinence programs since funding for such efforts began in 1999.

But the findings raise questions about just what those children are being taught in programs used by 69 organizations in 25 states.

The minority staff of the House Committee on Government Reform reports that 11 of 13 of the programs examined provide distorted information about the effectiveness of contraceptives in preventing pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, the risks associated with abortion, blurred ideological belief with accepted scientific fact and promote gender stereotypes as fact.

"Something is seriously wrong when federal tax dollars are being used to mislead kids about basic health faces," Waxman, a liberal and frequent critic of the Bush White House that requested the report, said on release of the review Wednesday.

Among the unproved claims, subjective conclusions or outright falsehoods cited in the review of the various programs criticized are statements in the teaching materials that abortions can lead to sterility and suicide, that half of all homosexual male teens in the United States test positive for the virus that causes AIDS, and that touching the genitalia of one's partner can bring about pregnancy.

While abortions clearly have risks like all medical procedures and can lead to depression and sterility of the mother, suicide and sterility are not shown to be major aftereffects of the procedure in the literature.

In addition, it remains unknown how many gay teenagers have contracted HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, but are not thought to remotely that high a level.

The investigators found that one program teaches, contrary to accepted medical belief, that HIV is spread via sweat and tears.

Other programs teach that condoms fail to stop the transmission of HIV 31 percent of the time during heterosexual sex and that the "popular claim" that condoms prevent the spread of STDs is not supported by data.

Federal research shows the failure rate for condoms is 3 percent when used properly, and while some sexually communicable diseases such as Human Papillomavirus can be transmitted even with condom use, barrier contraceptives are believed to greatly cut down on the exposure risk.

Some of the materials cited in the report state what many would consider to be an outdated view of gender roles as scientific fact, noting that men need "admiration" and "sexual fulfillment" while women need "financial support."

The findings were met with an expected response from both sides of the debate.

Lamba Legal, a gay legal activist group, announced that it would launch its own investigation into so-called abstinence-only education programs for potentially violating medical accuracy laws in states nationwide.

The Abstinence Clearinghouse, a non-profit group that distributes abstinence-related educational material, dismissed the finds as "mischaracterizations" of "statements taken out of context."

The group noted in a news release that those who developed the curricula in question stand by their validity, noting that all the information questioned was taken from peer-reviewed journals and government agency data.

They also noted that it would be unethical for abstinence educators to teach about condom use and other contraceptive methods, because it would violate federal funding requirements that hold such programs cannot instruct on the use of contraceptives.

And herein lies the major question surrounding the federal funding of abstinence-based sex ed: Is it a good idea, much less a good use of public funds?

The data showings its effectiveness is not absolute, but also not stellar.

One often-cited non-partisan study out of Columbia University found that while teenagers who take "virginity pledges" to wait and have intercourse until marriage may delay having sex by an average of 18 months, 88 percent eventually have premarital sex and in most cases not even until they are out of their teens.

They were also found less likely to use contraception.

Bill Albert, a spokesman for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, dismissed that the congressional findings should be viewed as the latest skirmish in the cultural wars about sex ed.

He told UPI that their polling shows that while there is a clear national consensus that young people should be encouraged to delay sex, most believe teens should also be given more information about both abstinence and contraception.

In their soon-to-be-released annual national survey of adults and teens on attitudes about teen sex and pregnancy, they found that 74 percent of adults and 67 percent of teens questioned said it is "very important" for teens to be given a strong societal message to delay sex until after high school.

But 74 percent of adults questioned and 60 percent of teens said they wished teens were getting more information about both abstinence and birth control.

In offering the Bush administration response to the Democratic findings, Dr. Alma Golden, the deputy assistant health and human services secretary for population affairs, stood by abstinence-only education, arguing that the congressional findings are taking parts of the programs under scrutiny out of context to push a political point.

"These issues have been raised before and discredited," Golden said in a statement. "One thing is very clear for our children, abstaining from sex is the most effective means of preventing the sexual transmission of HIV, STDs and preventing pregnancy."

But proponents of broader sexual-education efforts -- which include teaching not only the virtues of abstaining from sex, but also the need to use contraception and the risks of disease and pregnancy from having sex -- argue that even if abstinence programs are effective, they would leave a clear hole in what teenagers know about protecting themselves.

They note that while Golden, who is a pediatrician, is correct that sexual abstinence is the best way of preventing pregnancy or the spread of STDs, teenagers do have sex.

While there has been some reduction in the number of teenagers having intercourse in recent years, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, 61 percent of high school students have had intercourse by the time they graduate.

Dr. Mark Schuster, director of the UCLA-RAND Center for Adolescent Health Promotion, told UPI that he is concerned that inaccurate information could be being presented to youth about the risks associated with sex.

"The success of abstinence programs has been limited," said Schuster. "The studies have show abstinence programs not to have the kinds of effects they seek to have."

Schuster, a practicing pediatrician and co-author of "Everything You Never Wanted Your Kids to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid They'd Ask)," added that while more high-quality research is needed to get a full understanding of the impact of abstinence programs, even if such programs are eventually proven to reduce the number of teenagers having sex, there will still be kids having it.

They may be at higher risk for STDs and pregnancy because they were not adequately informed of the consequences.

He fears the public-health consequences of teenagers not getting proper education, which has the real potential to reverse the declining rates of unintended pregnancies and STDs among the young.

"Even if we find that abstinence programs reduce the percentage of kids that have sex, we will have to worry about the kids who continue to have sex," said Schuster. "There are still those who wind up in my office with sexually transmitted diseases or those that don't even know they have STDs and find out 10 years later they are unable to get pregnant because they have no idea they got Chlamydia when they were 16 years old."

(Please send comments to nationaldesk@upi.com.)

041202
UP041204

Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 2004. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.

AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.

Copyright ©1980, 2004. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .