Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rights and Liberties

States Say No To Sex-Ed Dough

By Brian H. Kehrl, Stateline.org. Posted December 3, 2005.


Maine has become the latest state to reject federal funding for sex education programs that teach only abstinence.
Advertisement

Maine has stepped out of the collection line of states getting federal money to help subsidize sex education, joining California and Pennsylvania in saying, "No, thanks."

Citing a potential conflict with a 2002 state law that mandates teaching teenagers everything from self-restraint to contraception, Maine declined about $160,000 in federal money for fiscal 2006. Maine would have had to pitch in about $120,000 had it accepted the federal money, and it would have had to focus sex education programs financed by the money on abstinence exclusively.

The state also refused to allow Heritage of Maine, a nonprofit, abstinence-education group, to put on its programs in Maine public schools. Heritage's programs, which are financed with a three-year, $1.5 million federal grant, are instead being conducted only in private schools.

Much of the debate over abstinence-only programs centers on their effectiveness or lack thereof. Groups opposed to the federal programs often cite a December 2004 study by the staff of U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) that found that 11 of 13 federally funded abstinence programs contained medically inaccurate information.

California has never accepted the federal money, which is provided under the 1996 welfare reform law, and Pennsylvania first turned it down in 2004. Officials from both states cited the programs' ineffectiveness in their decisions.

Maine's decision to just say no to the just say no-ers ended seven years of involvement in the federal grant program. The state had previously used the money to fund an ad campaign that encouraged teen abstinence and parental involvement in their children's choices regarding sex.

The decision not to reapply hinged on two factors, according to Dr. Dora Anne Mills, the state's public health director. An independent evaluation of the ad campaign found that it was having limited success in reaching kids and in affecting their decisions about sex. And federal policy-makers recently tightened the strings on how the money could be spent.

States previously were allowed to emphasize different ways of promoting abstinence, such as highlighting the risk of sexually transmitted diseases and encouraging discussions between parents and children. This year, Mills said, Maine was under pressure to tell teens that sex outside of marriage was unacceptable and that couples should be economically self-sufficient before they have sex. She said the federal government's insistence on emphasizing these messages could alienate teens and violate the state law requiring comprehensive, age-appropriate sex education.

Oversight of the federal grant money recently shifted to a new branch of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Administration for Children and Families. The change in oversight may have caused the change in standards, Nancy Birkhimer, the director of Teen and Young Adult Health for Maine, a division of the state department of public health, told Stateline.org.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Great article with clear reasoning of rejecting federal money
Posted by: ShaSpirit on Dec 2, 2005 2:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let hope other states will follow. What to make babies tell kids they cannot have sex until they can afford it and married. Oh, Please let us have sanity in 2006.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

thehugguy
Posted by: thehugguy on Dec 3, 2005 3:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Congratulations to Maine for rejecting misguided federal sex education money. Good common sense decisions like that make me want to move back home to snow country and leave this Georgia humidity and grits. I moved here decades ago only because miniskirts were more interesting than snowsuits. Staying in Maine would have been a better choice. No lobster rolls here! thehugguy@hotmail.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: thehugguy Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: thehugguy Posted by: crusty
Abstinence only sex ed is just like the typical failed "Just say no to drugs" strategy
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 3, 2005 7:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You have to give people a true understanding of why we must say no to drugs or for that matter teen sex. I can remember all those years that half of our school trips would be nothing but attending a non-motivating and uninspiring lecture on "don't do drugs". By 7th grade, students would act as if they never even heard of those lectures those I was glad never to do drugs or alcohol.

And by the way, having grown up in the "bible belt", I can tell you that even if there were sex ed based on abstinence only, teen pregnancies would definitely not go lower much less reach levels as low as the northeast.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» no to TEEN sex ? Posted by: 2rivers
» RE: no to TEEN sex ? Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: no to TEEN sex ? Posted by: bluegull
Just another unveiling, compliments of the Bush pt. II admin.
Posted by: karma on Dec 3, 2005 8:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know if it comes with age, but the obviousness of government in private affairs seems to be above and beyond anything I can remember. It is mostly (correct me if I'm wrong) a religous belief that one shouldn't have sex before marriage. This administration should be coined the "do as I say, not as I do" admin. With the VP's daughter participating in "alternative lifestyle" and the first daughters in and out of trouble, not to mention his niece and nephews' headlines--the government should be where they are wanted, not where they think they should be. And whatever happened to Bush's promise not to expand government, this program initative looks like government expansion to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» One Law, two worlds Posted by: Allison
» Religious or Cultural? Posted by: bluegull
Excellent. This is one of many problems with "federal education".
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Dec 3, 2005 9:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't say enough how pleased I am that people are standing up for education standards as a states' rights/responsibilities issue. The less we get the federal darn gubbamint involved, the better. After all, it takes a village to educate a child, not a disgustingly overarching and overreaching federal mandate.

Long live liberty, personal choice, and local governance.

P.S. Can we have those "rejected" dollars back?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

good for maine
Posted by: liberalibrarian on Dec 3, 2005 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not opposed to federal assistance grants, but am sick of the government forcing their right-wing (fundie/puritan/retro--call it what you will) agendas down the states' throats.

I lived a brief time in a small, conservative town in Colorado where, at one city council meeting, they declared "abstinence" week with much fanfare. The pregnancy rate is high, the education mediocre, the poverty around the bottom of Colorado--but there they were. This from a town that had "key parties" in the 70's and still popular sex-toy homeparties (in another small town in the region I hear they held them at the Elks Club)....
It's the hypocrisy stupid...
In a related issue regarding libraries, some districts are refusing LSTA (Library Services & Technology Act) money due to the feds recent demand for stricter filtering of Internet in public libraries. Libraries then need to purchase filtering software and monitor/babysit public computers, etc. All this for the new law CIPA (Child Internet Protection Act)...Unfortunately, the poor counties cannot afford to "say no" to this money--only the wealthy. Sound familiar?
Good for Maine and good for all those places that "say no" to federal bullying.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No (Public) School Left Open
Posted by: magistre on Dec 3, 2005 10:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
According to my federal (feral) representative, Henry Hyde, there are "no strings attached" to the "No Child Left Behind" law.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

State's Rights, My Ass!!
Posted by: fullavit@hotmail.com on Dec 3, 2005 11:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
State's rights ,eh! Oh the repugs are all about it, eh!! MY ASS!! This is but one example of many of The Repug's heavy handed opression of states rights!

The Medical Marijauna issue is another. The Bush administration, the wing-nut fundies, and the insurance lobby seem to write their dream list up, and The Repugs fall over themselves to fill it! Whether it's B21 or mandatory seatbelts, or abstinence only, they get it federaly funded and enforced!

Don't tell me all this shit about how it's an "incentive" program! Incentive is a like a carrot in front of a donkey! You gotta drag that wagon a long way before you eat that carrot! And even then it's not worth the effort for what you (WE) got! And where's the "incentive" concerning medical marijauna? State's Rights in-fucking-deed!

Stoney

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush administration SUCKS!! Forcing "abstinence" ed down our throats!
Posted by: Ziad on Dec 3, 2005 6:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I hate about the Bush administration is that they FORCE FEED their repugnant and vile political agenda down our country-and the world's-throats. There is not a spec of "inclusion" with these corporate fascists. They are not only at war with the rest of the civilized world, but they are in fact at war with a large portion of the USA's population: at war with Liberals, Democrats, Greens--and all others who value peace, justice, human rights and the environment. I could not be further alienated from the our government thanks to these fascist neo-con scum (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc). "Abstinence only": god what an unrealistic and fanatical bible-freak approach to sex ed. A sure failure and a proven failure--BUT that doesn't matter to ass-face bush jr! After all, he hates science--and prefers "intelligent design". The tragedy of having this asshole bush in office for EIGHT YEARS is that the damage this person and his administration has done to our country in so very many ways will take GENERATIONS to repair, if it ever does get repaired. It is a heart-breaking tragedy to see our country being ruined by these war criminals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Great and just slightly disturbing
Posted by: tjc on Dec 4, 2005 10:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think it's great that Maine has taken this step. The one thing that struck me in the article was this:

Republican state Sen. Deborah Plowman condemned the decision, the Bangor Daily News reported on Sept. 21. She criticized Gov. John Baldacci (D) and Mills for not first consulting the Legislature and asked her fellow legislators to join her in refusing future requests from the governor for budget increases for the public health department.

So Ms. Plowman wants to punish all of Maine's residents by denying more public health dpt. funding because she disagrees with the Governor. She sees it relevant to attempt to destroy the health system of the state in response to this. I would fear to be her child - if I dropped a plate and broke it, she might send me to my room and ground me for the next five years. It all seems quite backward-moving...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What would happen...
Posted by: Russron on Dec 4, 2005 9:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If all 50 States refused the Money?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oi vey.
Posted by: philosopherintraining on Dec 8, 2005 7:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It sounds like a conspiracy to me.

The government's thinly veiled attempts to reduce teen pregnancy by citing moral and economic reasons?

do popele ever really listen when it comes to money or morals? We're stubborn that way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As Maine goes, so goes the nation
Posted by: Doubtom on Dec 8, 2005 7:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maine always manages to do something that makes me proud to be a native son.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]