Or, more to the point, a deeply-flawed study tells us little about the efficacy of abstinence-only pledges. McGurn cites the mass-media frenzy over the results, but I was almost sick to my stomach over the outright cheering for this report on the radical left.The chain reaction was something out of central casting. A medical journal starts it off by announcing a study comparing teens who take a pledge of virginity until marriage with those who don't. Lo and behold, when they crunch the numbers, they find not much difference between pledgers and nonpledgers: most do not make it to the marriage bed as virgins.
Like a pack of randy 15-year-old boys, the press dives right in.
"Virginity Pledges Don't Stop Teen Sex," screams CBS News. "Virginity pledges don't mean much," adds CNN. "Study questions virginity pledges," says the Chicago Tribune. "Premarital Abstinence Pledges Ineffective, Study Finds," heralds the Washington Post. "Virginity Pledges Fail to Trump Teen Lust in Look at Older Data," reports Bloomberg. And on it goes.
In other words, teens will be teens, and moms or dads who believe that concepts such as restraint or morality have any application today are living in a dream world. Typical was the lead for the CBS News story: "Teenagers who take virginity pledges are no less sexually active than other teens, according to a new study."
Here's the rub: It just isn't true.
In fact, the only way the study's author, Janet Elise Rosenbaum of Johns Hopkins University, could reach such results was by comparing teens who take a virginity pledge with a very small subset of other teens: those who are just as religious and conservative as the pledge-takers. The study is called "Patient Teenagers? A Comparison of the Sexual Behavior of Virginity Pledgers and Matched Nonpledgers," and it was published in the Jan. 1 edition of Pediatrics.
The first to notice something lost in the translation was Dr. Bernadine Healy, the former head of both the Red Cross and the National Institutes of Health. Today she serves as health editor for U.S. News & World Report. And in her dispatch on this study, Dr. Healy pointed out that "virginity pledging teens were considerably more conservative in their overall sexual behaviors than teens in general -- a fact that many media reports have missed cold."
What Dr. Healy was getting at is that the pledge itself is not what distinguishes these kids from most other teenagers. The real difference is their more conservative and religious home and social environment. As she notes, when you compare both groups in this study with teens at large, the behavioral differences are striking. Here are just a few:
- These teens generally have less risky sex, i.e., fewer sexual partners.- These teens are less likely to have a teenage pregnancy, or to have friends who use drugs.
- These teens have less premarital vaginal sex.
- When these teens lose their virginity they tend to do so at age 21 -- compared to 17 for the typical American teen.
- And very much overlooked, one out of four of these teens do in fact keep the pledge to remain chaste -- amid much cheap ridicule and just about zero support outside their homes or churches.
Let's put this another way. The real headline from this study is this: "Religious Teens Differ Little in Sexual Behavior Whether or Not They Take a Pledge."
AmericaBlog jumps for joy in "Religious Right "Virginity Pledges" Do Not Work":
I'm sure the lunatic right will do their best to ignore the results. The big question here is whether Obama and the new Congress will put an end to funding this waste of money or if they will buckle under yet again to the anti-science, anti-rational American Taliban.This is the kind of "smart" discourse we see among those of "the reality based" community. Here's some of the roundup I found last week on Memeorandum (Macmind's and Outside the Beltway are the rational outliers):
* Maria / Jezebel: "No Sh-t: New Study Finds ‘Virginity Pledges’ ..."
* Matt Corley / Think Progress: "Study: Premarital abstinence pledges are ineffective.»"
*Cecile Richards / The Huffington Post: "Can You Hear Me Yet? — Today's Washington Post features yet … "
* Scott Swenson / RHRealityCheck.org blogs: "Virginity Pledges Fail Says Johns Hopkins Study."
* PERRspectives / PERRspectives Blog: "Study Shows Teens Unfaithful to Virginity Pledges."
* Josh Rosenau / Thoughts from Kansas: "Abstinence pledges still don't work, still encourage unprotected anal sex."
* Jeff Fecke / Alas, a blog: "Sun Rises in East, Sets in West."
* Michael J.W. Stickings / The Reaction: "Captain Obvious! Your story is up!"
* Pam Spaulding / Pam's House Blend: "Study: teen virginity pledges don't work."
* Maha / The Mahablog: "Be Prepared — There's another new study out saying … "
* Steve Benen / Washington Monthly: "ABSTINENCE PROGRAMS STILL DON'T WORK.... I don't want to alarm anyone ... "
* Mac Ranger / Macsmind: "Flawed Study on Virginity Pledges."
* James Joyner / Outside The Beltway: "Virginity Pledges Don't Work, Except When They Do."
13 comments:
Thanks so much for this. When I heard of the study I was surprised at the results. Now I know why. What a meaningless result. Kudos to Dr. Healy.
I'm going to post this on my blog. Many thanks.
Why does this not surprise me? I wish to heck that at least 50% of the time, we would be given the straight story. I would even take 25% if that meant one quarter of the time the whole truth were told! Any study can be skewed to benefit anyone, but when it is to help our kids, why would these morons not give it to us straight forward?
The fact that there can be no honest discourse about abstinence with these people, is proof positive they will never grow up themselves, and should not be allowed anywhere near our youth!
You're welcome, Pundette!
Trish: I just can't stand how the leftist cheer studies like this, which the claim as a grant for underage sex. There are no values on the left anymore, not at all. It's disgusting.
Since a blanket declaration has been made that I have no values it should be easier for you to ignore what I now write, nonetheless: here is a piece from the CNN article I quoted from when I posted about this study:
"While teens who take virginity pledges do delay sexual activity until an average age of 21 (compared to about age 17 for the average American teen), the reason for the delay is more likely due to pledge takers' religious background and conservative views -- not the pledge itself.
According to a study published Monday in the journal Pediatrics, pledge takers are as likely to have sex before marriage as other teens who are also religious, but don't take the pledge. However, pledge takers are less likely than other religious or conservative teens to use condoms or birth control when they do start having sex."
CNN, the "Clinton News Network" or whatever cute little nickname you guys on the right like to use for it, that bastion of liberal spin, states that the study was done between religious teens and that their upbringing and home environment are what keep them from having sex.
So yes, the pledges, taken almost exclusively by religious teens from what I've seen and read, don't have any effect except...that those kids are less likely to use condoms and birth control when they inevitably do have sex. Well, that's helpful.
Look, you have every right to raise your children any way you want and abstinence is the best way to keep from getting pregnant or acquiring an STD. We on the left have no problem with that; in fact, the less religious people reproducing the better, in my opinion. Our problem is with abstinence-only education programs.
As this study (which you call flawed without citing any evidence, Don: the thrust of your post is the media's interpretation of it) proves, abstinence-only pledges do not delay sexual activity in religious teens (their upbringing does) but they do lead to dangerous behaviour because those same teens are less likely to use birth control and safe sex methods than their peers when they do have sex.
As I say, teach abstinence: everybody devolopes at different rates physically and emotionally and every person should wait to have sex until they feel they are ready. All we're saying is: also teach teens about safe sex and birth control so that when they do have sex (as pretty much all of them will) they are having safe, protected sex.
And here's the bonus: fewer unwanted teen pregnancies means fewer abortions! Everybody wins.
Professor: off the subject a bit sir. One of the reasons I shut down my old site was the damn crazies that followed it that would have made this post of yours into a porno gab fest. One day will you let me in on the secret to keeping the nuts away?
But some of them were pretty funny too.
Donald, Truth says it well, crazies do take the time to post crazy stuff, both here and anywhere they can act like the fools they are, with no regard for human value.
When it comes to our children and grandchildren, it is definitely important that we stop the liars and especially the incoherent haters, from being heard undisputed, and repeated on our sites. They have no values, they have no valid content to add, yet they cannot stop themselves from posting. They are grasping at straws, and as desperate as any non-focused nonfaithful people can ever be. They have no "they" to them.
God bless them and help them to find their way.
I had to chuckle when last week the Today Show almost gleefully reported on the study about virgin pledges. I chuckled, because their "amnesia" was so apparent. They had quickly forgotten the CDC's devastating report last spring about 1 in 4 teenage girls having an STD and, I believe, 1 in 2 Black girls. That story quickly disappeared from the headlines, though, I'm sure because it showed how much our country's OVERALL sex ed programs are failing.
Here's something that is related:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28538524/
Turns out Mississippi has the highest teen pregnancy rates, while New England has the lowest.
Now, do the math. Which of these states is all red and which are all blue?
Just wondering where Alaska is on this scale. Probably pretty high, given the Palin family practice of teen pregnancy.
Tim: Mississippi's most likely the poorest, and a good proportion of these pregnancies are most likely black. The fact that you ignore this reveals your total opportunism and lack of compassion.
Sure Donald. Now explain to me once again how the Palin family stand in relation to the teen pregnancy problem.
Thought so.
For the record Donald, if you bothered to read the piece, you would see that the top ten states for teen pregnancies are all red states. You telling me it's all down to African Americans?
Credibility? The fact that you ignore this means you simply don't do your research before spouting.
Don, fiscal inequalities aside (which you and your side seem to ignore during most discussions of race: lack of compassion?) black families are much more likely to be religiously conservative. What is your point in bringing up race in a religious context?
And I noticed that you conveniently ignored my points about CNN's coverage of this study and the dearth of safe sex practices amongst pledge taking teens. Am I to assume that you condone ignorance of condoms and other birth control methods? I'm sure your other readers are curious as to why you left these points out of your original post as well.
Post a Comment