Abstinence-Only Funding May Be Cut Off Under Obama

Now that Bush is leaving office, critics are lining up to mount an offensive to cut off federal funding for sex education programs that preach abstinence-only. Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood, is one of the objectors. Richards says that the federal programs have spent more than $1.5 billion over the last decade for ineffective programs that can actually harm teens by not giving them enough information. She added that there have been several major research studies in recent years that found no evidence supporting the claims that teaching abstinence-only will help deter teens from having unprotected sex.

"Talking with Obama, he totally understands the need for young people to have comprehensive sex education - they need information that protects their health," Richards said. "I hope that will be the position of the administration, but when Congress gets involved, sometimes things get more complicated." Although his camp has not released the details of his budget plan, Obama’s position is that comprehensive sex education is better because it offers advice to teens about how to use contraception if they do choose to be sexually active.

Despite the power shift in Washington, those who support abstinence-only are still appealing to Obama to keep some federal funding in the till for their programs. One option, they say, is that Congress can allow a true choice in education by providing funding for both approaches to sex education. Recent studies have shown that births and sexually transmitted diseases have both been steadily increasing, so proponents of the "true choice" option say that now would be a bad time to oppose funding for either approach. At the present time about $176 million in funding is spent each year on abstinence-only.

Regardless of what happens on the national level some states have their own plans for how to handle sex education. Only about half of the states in the country receive abstinence funding from the federal government; the remaining states have refused to participate in the program. "Abstinence education will remain a strategy of our youth development initiative regardless of what happens at the federal level," said Jen Bennecke, executive director of Georgia’s Governor's Office for Children and Families. Georgia plans to keep abstinence-only programs in schools, supplementing the federal funding with more than $500,000 in state funding. Georgia’s program includes not only teaching about abstinence, but also the importance of developing character. Since it began over 11 years ago, Georgia’s program is credited with playing a big part in a 50% decrease in the number of teenage pregnancies in the state.

The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unwanted Pregnancy weighed in on the debate on the side of a comprehensive program. The campaign believes that a program based in science, not character, is more effective and that abstinence-only approaches are not as successful in preventing teen pregnancy.

Those who support abstinence-only programs say that it is the only method proven to be 100% effective for preventing sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies among teens. But critics claim that such programs have no effect on deterring teens from having sex, and they offer no needed information on how to avoid getting pregnancy or getting an STD. They also claim that such programs do not tell the truth about the reliability of condoms.

While the debate continues to rage about which type of sex education approach is better, the federal government should fund research on both types of programs, to determine which programs are successful. But because federal dollars are in short supply these days, here’s an idea-wonder if parents would be willing to step in and provide some education at home? It wouldn’t cost a penny.