Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
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.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Whether It's Sex or Drugs, Abstinence-Only Education Simply Doesn't Work

By Marsha Rosenbaum and Jennifer Kern, AlterNet. Posted September 10, 2008.


Abstinence-only education simply doesn't work, no matter how much Sarah Palin or George Bush dream it will.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Recently it was revealed that the 17-year-old daughter of the Republican vice presidential nominee is pregnant. This announcement was particularly ironic, as the GOP platform advocates abstinence-only sex education.

This high-profile pregnancy is stirring a larger debate about how sex education is taught in the United States. What is clear is that despite strong messages urging young people to abstain, most teenagers, even those who have been admonished time and time again, are not listening.

Our national surveys confirm doubts about abstinence-only education. Last year, a study commissioned by Congress revealed that students who receive abstinence-only sex education are just as likely to be sexually active as those who do not. This research is consistent with the conclusions reached two years ago by a joint Yale-Columbia study of teenage virginity pledges.

The same is true for the other big concern about teenagers: drug use. Look at abstinence-only drug education, and you get the same disappointing results as with sex education. More than two decades ago, as part of the escalating war on drugs and Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" campaign, Congress implemented the 1986 Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act. Federally funded drug prevention education for teens was mandated to adhere to a strict abstinence-only message.

And so it is today, with information going beyond pure abstention -- such as the need for designated driver programs -- just as verboten as discussions of condoms in abstinence-only sex education.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) continues to restrict its funding of school-based drug education to abstinence-only programs. And the drug czar's office is now, in addition to its media campaign, aggressively pushing across-the-board, suspicion-less drug testing as the "silver bullet" that will absolutely ensure abstinence among secondary school students.

These strategies have proven just as unsuccessful as abstinence-only sexuality education. Studies of Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.), still the most popular school-based prevention program in the United States, have consistently shown that there is no difference in terms of drug use between students who had D.A.R.E. and those who did not. Even the effectiveness of the newer "science-based" programs, often delivered inadequately, is questionable.

As for the drug czar's billion-dollar anti-drug media campaign, several researchers, as well as the Government Accountability Office, have shown that the ads are ineffective and sometimes actually counterproductive in convincing teens to abstain.

The newest brainchild of the Bush administration, random student drug testing, is being foisted upon school districts despite a large federally funded study, conducted by National Institute on Drug Abuse scientists, showing no difference in rates of drug use in schools with and without drug testing. Objections have also been raised by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence and other national organizations representing educators and public health and social workers.

Take a look at annual assessments of the prevalence of teen drug use for even more evidence of the failure of abstinence-only education.

The 2007 federally funded "Monitoring the Future" survey of high school students revealed that 73 percent used alcohol (a drug by any measure) by the time they graduated, and 46.8 percent admitted to trying illicit drugs. While alcohol use has declined slightly, the use of prescription painkillers and other psychoactive medications is on the rise, with last month's annual back-to-school survey conducted by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse showing that 24 percent of the teens surveyed said they know one or more friends or classmates who abuse prescription drugs or use them without a prescription.

Most Americans know by now that "Just Say No" and other abstinence-only mandates as the sole basis of prevention do not work. While encouraging abstinence, programs should offer prevention education based on science rather than scare tactics.

The next administration can make a big impact on both sex and drug education and move prevention strategies in a positive direction if it has the gumption to look beyond the decades-old failures of the past. It's time to change the "No" to "Know" in our approach to sex and drugs.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: abstinence

Marsha Rosenbaum, Ph.D., directs the San Francisco office of the Drug Policy Alliance. She is the author of Safety First: A Reality-Based Approach to Teens, Drugs and Drug Education.

Jennifer Kern manages the Safety First Project of the Drug Policy Alliance.

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

Advertisement
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:
Sometimes the drug education does more harm than good
Posted by: fanny666 on Sep 10, 2008 1:39 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I work at a University, a colleague of mine does research into teen drug use. She was explaining that, often, when a teen sees 2 TV ads, one saying "Marijuana is horrible and it will ruin your life" and another ad saying "Heroin is horrible and it will ruin your life" - all nuance is lost. The kid tries pot, realizes that his/her life did not end and figures, "They must be lying about heroin too."

Honest and frank discussions within the family are always going to be more effective than propaganda.

Oversimplification and all-or-none thinking are thought patterns that are really damaging America. These logic errors are everywhere.

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

That old river in Egypt
Posted by: Crazy H on Sep 10, 2008 2:41 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't find the reference, unfortunately.

It seems that a medieval scientist (alchemist?) wanted to prove that salamanders were fire-resistant as per the legends. He gathered one up, lit a fire, and threw the hapless salamander in.

The salamander burned, of course. But our intrepid scientist kept right on believing in the salamanders' nonflammable properties.

So too, so many of our repug-lickin' friends. Here Palin has a first-hand example of the efficacy of abstinence education - but she keeps right on believing. I'll bet that her kids smoke pot, as well.

This propensity for denial in the face of overwhelming evidence explains a lot about conservative beliefs surrounding evolution, global warming, and the roots of Islamic terrorism.

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

I'd Strongly Suggest Re-Titling This Article
Posted by: grumble-bum on Sep 10, 2008 4:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point the authors seem to be making is that prohibition never works.

I can assure you that abstinence (from drugs, anyway) works just fine, if you've already been through the wringer.

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

Mike Males
Posted by: mmales on Sep 10, 2008 9:37 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This week, the Census revealed youth poverty was rising in the US even as older age groups became richer. Six million teenagers living in crushing poverty have REAL problems. But...not a single article or comment in the left-wing press.

Earlier this year, the national Child Maltreatment 2006 reported 80,000 teens age 12-17 were confirmed victims of violent and sexual abuses by their parents and caretakers in 2006 (including 100 who were murdered), and another 40,000 were victimized by severe emotional abuses. Abused teens have REAL problems. But...again, not a word about this crisis in the left-wing press.

One-fourth of children and teens live with drug- or alcohol-abusing parents and caretakers, SAMHSA reports. Teens with addicted, unstable, broken-up parents suffer REAL problems. But... none of the left-wing writers (AND none of the right-wing and centrist authors) seem to care.

Oh, but there's an ocean of space for writer after writer to repeat identical left-wing "culture war" arguments berating Britany, Paris, Bristol, Bratz dolls, beer ads, abstinence education, fashion ads, MySpace, cellphones, rap, high school car washes, and every other fictional media/cultural "image" the yuppie fretters feel must be corrupting their precious little cherubs' fragile little brains. Please. Shut up. If your upscale kids have problems, it's because they suffer parents who indulge such idiotic escapism.

Every one of these articles week after dismal week is absolutely identical. In the case of Bristol, they've turned mean. None of you know her. None of you have any idea why she got pregnant, or what kind of mother she'll be (Rosalynn Carter got married at 18 and pregnant at 19--she was a pretty good mom, right?) So, left-wing culture-warriors, in the name of basic decency, stop your ignorant, cowardly stereotypes and condescensions exploiting Bristol (which only create sympathy for your real target, Sarah Palin's abysmal candidacy) and get back to talking about real stuff affecting real teens--rampant poverty, family abuses, addicted and messed-up parents, disinvestment in education and jobs...yeah, REAL outrages progressives USED TO force into public discussion.
Mike Males, http://www.YouthFacts.org

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

» RE: Mike Males Posted by: Malkavian
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
comprehensive sex ed vs. abstinence only
Posted by: bswen on Sep 17, 2008 1:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out this short video on comprehensive sex education vs. abstinence-only curriculum.

Thanks,
Brady Swenson
RH Reality Check

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