10
Feb
10

Sex Education

I absolutely love laugh at loathe self-reporting in experiments where the subjects know the purpose of the study. This is part of the reason I tend to not put much weight on sex education studies which look at behaviors, but they are still interesting when they get abused. It is much more interesting to look at disease rates, abortion rates, and pregnancy rates to judge the efficacy of a program. (Kind of difficult to deny having sex under these circumstances, although it was probably done in ancient times and does exist among some species-no mammals are known to do this naturally)

Behavioral and psychological studies tend to require a bit of trickery on the part of the experimenter, making sex educational studies a bit difficult to trust, since it’s a little easy (even for the students) to understand the point of these, particularly when measuring self-reporting. More importantly, however, it is important to realize what demographic this study is focused on. The demographic is 10-14 year old students. This means that a 29% rate of sexual intercourse in this demographic is a little high for the control group (a previous study found 17% by age 14 without narrowing by demographic). This indicates an underlying issue which could be being compensated for in the abstinence-only education or activities associated with it which is not being targeted in the control group (which was just taught about not smoking). Wikipedia and Catholic.org indicate many misunderstandings (intentional or not) concerning this research paper exist. Namely, the difference between experimental and control group MODEL ESTIMATES (33% and 48% respectively) of sexual activity versus observed numbers (20% and 29% respectively). The model estimates seem a bit high to me, considering all studies I’ve seen indicate much lower numbers (closer-usually lower-to the observed numbers for these ages).

What this study isn’t:

  1. It isn’t a “game changing” study; it just indicates that abstinence centric education may be useful in certain demographics
  2. It isn’t saying 52% of kids would have sex with no sex education (29% did in the control group, far from the 52% the Catholics.org article cites)
  3. It isn’t saying all used models of abstinence-only education are right!
  4. It doesn’t address the previous studies which indicate comprehensive sex education greatly decreases pregnancy and STD rates, nor does it explain this discrepancy

I’m not saying including abstinence as part of a comprehensive sexual education curriculum isn’t vital. Indeed, much can be said for explaining that this is the most effective way of preventing sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. I would actually state that abstinence-centered techniques should probably be taught at the age group this study targets (11-13 year olds) with emphasis on the consequences associated with sex. I would especially note that the abstinence education in this study focused on delaying sexual intercourse for a few years rather and not demonizing contraceptive use other than the “wait until marriage/condoms are bad” mantra repeated by religiously motivated individuals.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “Sex Education”


  1. February 18, 2010 at 3:59 am

    Nice post! I really like your posting.
    i will come back to read more of your posts.

    Cheers

  2. March 3, 2014 at 12:40 pm

    You could certainly see your expertise in the work you write.
    The arena hopes for more passionate writers like you who aren’t afraid to say how they believe.
    Always follow your heart.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Join the best atheist themed blogroll!

RSS Adventures in Ethics and Science

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Blag Hag

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS denialism blog

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS ERV

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Greg Laden’s Blog

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Laelaps

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Lawful Good Wonk

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted)

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Pharyngula

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Tetrapod Zoology

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS White Coat underground

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Older stuff

wordpress stats

%d bloggers like this: