If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
sky high teen pregnancyb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 8 Jul 2007, Ray Fischer wrote: osprey wrote: John Mayson wrote: On Thu, 6 Jul 2007, Ray Fischer wrote: Abstinence education, included with all other birth control methods, is worthwhile. It is CRAP. It doesn't work. Studies have shown as much. Care to cite these "studies"? There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinance along with other birth control means. I totally agree. With people like Fisher and IAAH, it's got to be just their way only..no compramising. You spend YOUR money promoting your religion. abstinance != religion - -- John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) iD8DBQFGn+zE2kz4fWh3iuERAsl+AJ0VKSPVIcEUkUI2dfiyfl IDujMSbwCgryLY RWnOFmJZ5rP+DieIkf/X1h0= =C+t+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
sky high teen pregnancyb
In article om,
John Mayson wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 8 Jul 2007, james g. keegan jr. wrote: In article , John Mayson wrote: Abstinence education, included with all other birth control methods, is worthwhile. It is CRAP. It doesn't work. Studies have shown as much. Care to cite these "studies"? There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinance along with other birth control means. even the bush administration's own studies, as well as several others, demonstrated that teaching abstinence didn't result in fewer pregnancies. Okay. Provide links to this. I can claim anything under the sun too. Doesn't make it true. there were a half dozen or more posts here referencing it. you can get the basic idea here http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/053107HA.shtml of course there is far more when you consider that in the other nations where bush pushed for abstinence only the hiv numbers grew as did teen pregnancies. the conclusion is obvious; what should be taught is something that works .... assuming that a reduction in unwanted pregnancies is really what is wanted. Different things work for different kids. Some will abstain. Some won't. It's immoral to teach everything BUT abstinance or abstinance and nothing else. it's more immoral, as well as dangerous, to waste time and money teaching something which has demonstrated that it doesn't work just to support a minority religious view. i have no problem with teachers stating the obvious, but to waste any time on it is silly. of course, reducing pregnancies isn't a goal of the right. controlling behavior is. I wouldn't know. why not? isn't it obvious? -- get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
sky high teen pregnancyb
In article om,
John Mayson wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 8 Jul 2007, james g. keegan jr. wrote: In article , John Mayson wrote: Abstinence education, included with all other birth control methods, is worthwhile. It is CRAP. It doesn't work. Studies have shown as much. Care to cite these "studies"? There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinance along with other birth control means. even the bush administration's own studies, as well as several others, demonstrated that teaching abstinence didn't result in fewer pregnancies. Okay. Provide links to this. john, i responded to this in another post but I think the information below is everything you want. Message-ID: 8325f7360706260939v400ffaefsa770b92829142cbe@mail .gmail.com Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:09:58 +0530 From: "Sweety Prem Kumar R" To: Subject: Abstinence & Prevention MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_21701_20059805.1182875998985" ------=_Part_21701_20059805.1182875998985 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message from *Ray Martin, Executive Director* *Christian Connections for International Health* Dr. Kumar, This is the second time I tried to send the message and as you can see by the email I am forwarding, it did not go through. I will copy the text below. I will also send it separately as an attachment in hope of preserving the formatting so you can send easily copy it to send out. *Friends on AIDS-Beyond-Borders listserv,* * * *At the request of Dr. R.S. Prem Kumar, I am forwarding this message that was circulated on our ABCplus listserv. * ** Although policies and regulations governing U.S. Government support for sex education and abstinence promotion overseas are not the same as those for domestic programs, we offer in this message dueling studies on the domestic debate between what is commonly referred to as "comprehensive sex education" and "abstinence-only" education. Interestingly, although the two studies may seem to arrive at some quite divergent conclusions, both were funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Welfare. The key finding of the April study of four abstinence education programs (item II below) is "that the programs had no effect on the sexual abstinence of youth." Now, this new study (item I below) charges that programs that endorse condom use are marred by imbalance and inaccuracies, and were only marginally successful in persuading young people to use condoms or, better yet, to delay having sex. I. The first item below is an article on a just published study entitled *Review of Comprehensive Sex Education Curricula.* The article is online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...07/06/20/AR200 7062002235.htmland the HHS report is accessible at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb.../06122007-1534 24.PDF II. The second item below, reported in an April 18, 2007, ABCplus listserv message and described in this article online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...07/04/13/AR200 7041301003.html, reports on a study entitled *Impacts of Four Title V, Section 510 Abstinence Education Programs*. It can be downloaded at http://www.mathematica.org/publicati...abstinence.pdf I. HHS Counters With Its Own Sex-Ed Critique By Christopher Lee, Washington Post Staff Writer, Thursday, June 21, 2007; A21 Liberal critics periodically complain that federally funded "abstinence only" sex-education materials are full of false or misleading statements about the effectiveness of condoms and other issues. Now the Bush administration is firing back, charging that programs that endorse condom use also are marred by imbalance and inaccuracies. The latest round in the sex-ed culture war comes in a 40-page report by the Department of Health and Human Services that critiqued "comprehensive sex-education curricula" -- materials that teach about both abstinence and the use of condoms and other protective methods. The analysis -- requested two years ago by Sen. Tom Coburn (Okla.) and former senator Rick Santorum (Pa.), both conservative Republicans -- concluded that nine widely used curricula contained misleading statements about condom failure, focused too little on abstinence and were only marginally successful in persuading young people to use condoms or, better yet, to delay having sex. "This study shows that very little of the message is around abstinence," said Harry Wilson, an associate commissioner in HHS's Administration on Children, Youth and Families. "When it comes to what they actually do in their curricula, this shows that it is kind of given the short end of the stick." One curriculum, Safer Choices Level 1, mentioned condoms 383 times and abstinence only five, the report said. But Douglas Kirby, a senior research scientist at ETR Associates, the California-based nonprofit organization that developed the curriculum, said the materials make the same point with different language, using phrases such as "choosing not to have sex" or "saying no to sex." "It's all about abstinence; it's just different words," Kirby said. "There's twice as much material in this curriculum on abstinence than on condoms and contraception." HHS spends about $176 million a year on abstinence education, said Wilson, who did not know the comparable figure for comprehensive sex education. The new study, which cost $77,000, was done by the nonprofit Sagamore Institute for Policy Research in Indianapolis and the Medical Institute for Sexual Health, an Austin-based nonprofit group that advocates that adolescents and adults remain abstinent "until committing to a life-long mutually monogamous relationship such as marriage." It is the latest burst in a rhetorical exchange that has been raging for years. In 2004, Henry A. Waxman (D), a liberal California congressman, issued an analysis that found that 11 of 13 abstinence-only curricula contained medically inaccurate or misleading information, including assertions that touching a person's genitals can result in pregnancy and that condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse. The HHS report said that of the nine curricula it reviewed, six had medically inaccurate statements, most commonly that the spermicide nonoxynol-9 reduced the risk of contracting HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said that it does not protect against such infections. The HHS report said that eight of the curricula contained no inaccuracies about statistics related to condom effectiveness, but that the numbers sometimes lacked context. For example, programs that say latex condoms prevent pregnancy 97 percent of the time when used correctly (the figure actually is 98 percent, experts said) should also note that studies show that the probability of pregnancy during the first year of "typical" use is 15 percent. Not everyone uses condoms properly every time. The report also objected to statements such as, "Condoms made of latex provide good protection from HIV when used correctly and consistently during vaginal, anal or oral sex." It said such statements lacked "explicit details" about condom failure rates. James Trussell, a demographer at Princeton University whose research on condom failures was cited frequently in the HHS report, said the authors got the data right but overstated the importance of the errors. "These examples of medical inaccuracies pale in comparison to those in abstinence-only curricula," he said in an e-mail. "Many errors cited in the Waxman report are egregious, whereas many errors cited in the [HHS] report are not." II. Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs By Laura Sessions Stepp, Washington Post Staff Writer, Saturday, April 14, 2007; A02 A long-awaited national study has concluded that abstinence-only sex education, a cornerstone of the Bush administration's social agenda, does not keep teenagers from having sex. Neither does it increase or decrease the likelihood that if they do have sex, they will use a condom. Authorized by Congress in 1997, the study followed 2000 children from elementary or middle school into high school. The children lived in four communities -- two urban, two rural. All of the children received the family life services available in their community, in addition, slightly more than half of them also received abstinence-only education. By the end of the study, when the average child was just shy of 17, half of both groups had remained abstinent. The sexually active teenagers had sex the first time at about age 15. Less than a quarter of them, in both groups, reported using a condom every time they had sex. More than a third of both groups had two or more partners. "There's not a lot of good news here for people who pin their hopes on abstinence-only education," said Sarah Brown, executive director of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, a privately funded organization that monitors sex education programs. "This is the first study with a solid, experimental design, the first with adequate numbers and long-term follow-up, the first to measure behavior and not just intent. On every measure, the effectiveness of the programs was flat." The report's release comes as questions are being raised in several quarters about abstinence programs. A bill introduced in Congress, sponsored by both Republican and Democratic members, would allocate money for sex education that teaches abstinence and contraception. In addition, eight states that used to receive funding for abstinence programs have decided to stop doing so, two of them very recently. Federal abstinence funds come up for congressional renewal this summer under the Title V grant. The federal government spends $176 million a year on abstinence-only education, and millions more are spent every year in state and local matching grants. Harry Wilson, a top official in the Department of Health and Human Services, said yesterday that the administration has no intention of changing funding priorities in light of the results. "This study isn't rigorous enough to show whether or not [abstinence-only] education works," Wilson said. Some federal money, in addition to state and local dollars, supports comprehensive sex education, he said. What is spent on abstinence "is not that much money when it comes to offering an alternative to the other message." He said modifications in the program are already being considered, including a focus on low-income neighborhoods and extending instruction into high school. The study did not address the impact of a student's family income on the effectiveness of abstinence-only programs. The results came as a bit of surprise even to Christopher Trenholm, who supervised the project at Mathematica Policy Research Inc. An early analysis by his organization showed some attitude shifts toward delaying sex among students in the abstinence programs, but those differences disappeared as students got older. One thing they also learned, Trenholm said, was that kids receiving abstinence instruction did not use condoms less often than other kids, a possibility that critics occasionally raise. They also showed slightly better knowledge about the prevention of sexually transmitted disease. Kids in both groups were knowledgeable about the risks of having sex without using a condom or other form of protection. Knowing that did not mean they put on a condom every time, however. Condom use was not high in either group; of those who had sex, almost half said they used condoms only "sometimes" or "never." Brown said Mathematica's results underscore what other, smaller studies have shown: "The most effective programs are those that say abstinence is the best choice but birth control and protection are also worth knowing about." An official at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States agreed. "Comprehensive education means teaching about abstinence and a myriad of other topics," said spokeswoman Martha Kempner. Among them, she said: "contraception, critical thinking, one's own values and the values of your family and your religious community. "Abstinence-only was an experiment and it failed." -- get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican. |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
sky high teen pregnancyb
John Mayson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 8 Jul 2007, Ray Fischer wrote: osprey wrote: John Mayson wrote: On Thu, 6 Jul 2007, Ray Fischer wrote: Abstinence education, included with all other birth control methods, is worthwhile. It is CRAP. It doesn't work. Studies have shown as much. Care to cite these "studies"? There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinance along with other birth control means. I totally agree. With people like Fisher and IAAH, it's got to be just their way only..no compramising. You spend YOUR money promoting your religion. abstinance != religion Yes, it does, when it's a religious agenda and not supported by evidence. -- Ray Fischer |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
sky high teen pregnancyb
John Mayson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 8 Jul 2007, Ray Fischer wrote: John Mayson wrote: Ray Fischer wrote: Abstinence education, included with all other birth control methods, is worthwhile. It is CRAP. It doesn't work. Studies have shown as much. Care to cite these "studies"? There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinance along with other birth control means. Sinxe when are the schools supposed to be teaching your religion or your morality? I thought that you right wingers didn't like schools teaching morality. Or is it that you only want YOUR "morality" taught? Who mentioned religion? I didn't. Abstinance is not the same was religion. Pull the other one. What I want is for young people to have all the information we can give them about sexuality and censor nothing. That is contrary to abstinence only education. You want to censor abstinance education because it doesn't fit into YOUR morality. No, because it doesn't work. -- Ray Fischer |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pre-Teen/Teen Tandem Team | Claire Petersky | General (moderated) | 1 | February 12th 05 11:56 PM |
Pre-Teen/Teen Tandem Team | Claire Petersky | General | 0 | February 12th 05 10:50 PM |
High School Obstetrics (Chiropractic at Olathe High?) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | December 14th 04 08:12 PM |
Judge wrong to split teen & family teen wanted out FW: | Fern5827 | Spanking | 0 | January 18th 04 04:07 PM |