An unwanted pregnancy isn’t THE biggest problem. 

The lifestyle and belief system that led to it is.

Are you single and wondering how to not get pg?

~Don’t have sex.~

In the case of unmarried women (not just young girls), think on these things:

(provided by CareNet Crisis PG Center, Okanogan WA)

New Study Gives More Evidence for Effectiveness of Abstinence Education

Prepared by NAEA, February 5, 2010

Background

“Abstinence-only program helps kids postpone sex,” read the Reuters headline on February 2, 2010.

A landmark study was released February 1, 2010 that measured three distinct sex education programs, using a randomized control study. It is published in the February edition of Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine and adds to the growing body of research showing the effectiveness of abstinence education programs. It found that abstinence education was very effective at reducing teen sex and worked better than both “comprehensive” sex education and “safe” sex programs.

The research has been widely covered by every major media outlet, including the Washington Post, The New York Times, and USA Today. Even those who have been hesitant to acknowledge the value of abstinence education in the past have called this study a “game changer.”

This study signifies rigorous research demonstrating the effectiveness of abstinence-centered education and joins 17 other abstinence studies with positive behavioral impact included in the NAEA document, Abstinence Works 2010.

This newly published research provides a golden opportunity to call for abstinence education to be given priority status in federal, state, and local sex education funding, policies and decision-making.

Findings

The study showed that a high-risk population of 662 sixth and seventh graders receiving abstinence-centered education had the following behavioral changes:

• Reduced sexual initiation (32.6% that had received the abstinence intervention initiated sex vs. 51.8% that received “safer sex” and 41.8% that received “comprehensive” sex education.)
• Reduced the number of sexual partners (a crucial determinant in acquiring an STD), and
• Further showed that abstinence instruction did not deter the use of condoms (a common charge brought by anti-abstinence critics). 
• The author cites the value of a single focused abstinence approach for encouraging sexual delay, as opposed to a mixed “comprehensive” message. (AP article 2/2/10: “Jemmott said the single focus may have been better at encouraging abstinence than the other approaches in his study. ‘The message was not mixed with any other messages,’ said Jemmott.)

Note: This information should challenge the policy that claims to want to fund “evidence-based programs,” yet ignore this important study. (Please feel free to use some or all of the following points, as appropriate, in your educational and media efforts.)

This new study gives evidence that………

Talking point #1:

...Single-focused abstinence-centered education is the most effective approach in reducing teen sex.

The study clearly showed that students receiving the Abstinence centered approach were significantly less likely to initiate sex than either the “Safe-Sex” and “Comprehensive” sex education approaches. The safer sex and comprehensive interventions did not significantly reduce sexual initiation.

Talking point #2

...Abstinence education has a long-term positive impact on teens’ sexual behavior.

Reduction in teen sex continued over a 24-month timeframe.

Talking point #3:

...Abstinence education is effective among high-risk teens.

Study was conducted among urban, low-income, African American youth, a population at high risk for pregnancy and STDs, including HIV.

Talking point #4:

...Proves critics wrong: abstinence education does not reduce condom use among teens who do have sex.

In comparing students who received abstinence education vs. students in the control, the study found students enrolled in an abstinence program were no less likely to use condoms.

Talking point #5

...Abstinence education is preferred in many communities and must continue to be a choice we offer to youth.

The abstinence–centered approach is preferred over condom-based instruction in many communities throughout the country, as cited in the study. Offering parents and schools a choice in the type of sex education their children receive not only supports American pluralism but the value of local control in education.

Talking point #6

…Abstinence education should regain federal funding.

These evidence-based findings should encourage Congress to reconsider the previous decision to eliminate all abstinence funding. Supporting effective ways to reach teens should be our primary concern and separate funding for effective approaches will help us to address the complex issue of teen sex.

Talking point #7

… Abstinence education focuses on health, not morals.

It is illegal for any federally funded program to teach religion.  The content of all federally funded abstinence curricula have been reviewed and approved by the United States Department of Health and Human Services and are risk avoidance primary prevention models for health.

 Jemmott, J. B., Jemmott L. S.,Fong G. T. (2010). Efficacy of a theory-based abstinence-only intervention over 24 months. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2010;164(2):152-159.

Link: http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/164/2/152?home

[Home] [About Us] [WHO IS OUR NEIGHBOR?] [God's Word for You Today] [Prayer Closet] [SIGNS OF THE TIMES] [Chronic Disabling Diseases] [Urgent Care Center] [Crisis Pg/Post Abortion Counseling] [Abuse/Domestic Violence] [Dealing With Grief] [Contact Us]