Just an interesting tidbit I caught in the NY Times this Sunday.  Our Government spends $176 Million a year promoting abstinence.  A report studying the program found out that the program didn’t make any difference.  No surprises, as far I am concerned, that those who attended abstinence classes vs. those who don’t are still having sex around the same age.  By the way, the median age is 14.9 years. 

Our tax dollars go to a federal program to make sure that our kids don’t have sex until they are what? Married, old enough (what is old enough), found the right one…who knows what is taught.   I loved this quote from the article "interventions are not like vaccines, you can’t expert one dose in middle school, or a small dose, to be protective all throughout the youth’s high school career".  No shit and by the way when the sexual hormones start exploding, doesn’t it make sense to promote safe sex instead? 

This is no different than talking to your kids about drinking and smoking.  Open dialogs, information on proper behavior is more beneficiary than no.  No doesn’t work.  No is an opening for yes. 

Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to spend $176 million on educating our kids on safe sex and healthy relationships vs. abstinence?

Comments (Archived):

  1. Doug

    14.9 – that’s a scary statistic – I’d like to see the standard deviation.

    Growing up, we had sex ed starting in 5th grade.