Abstinence Education is Dangerous for Connecticut Teens.

Many parents don't talk with their children about sex, because they are uncomfortable, don't know what to say, and mistakenly think that schools are doing the job.[1] However, Connecticut has no designated funding stream for comprehensive sexuality education in schools.

• 94 percent of Connecticut residents agree that, "In the era of AIDS, young people need information and skills from sex education to protect their health and lives."[2]
• Over $1 million of federal funded Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE) comes into CT each year via two Community Based Organizations. Nationally, since CBAE began in 2001 it has increased over 450% to a total expenditure level of $113 million.[3]
• Research shows that teenagers who receive sex education that includes discussions on contraception are more likely than those who receive abstinence-only messages to delay sexual activity and to use contraceptives and condoms when they do become sexually active. In addition, the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence suggests that addressing abstinence and contraception does not increase sexual activity.[4]
• Research has shown that comprehensive sexuality education programs result in consistent condom use among teenagers who are sexually active.[5,6,7] This is particularly important considering 64% of sexually active teenagers in CT didn't use condoms the last time they had sex.
• A recent study of four abstinence education programs, conducted by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., found that the programs had no effect on the sexual abstinence of youth.[8] A recent Congressional review found that 80% of the most popular abstinence-only curricula contain false or misleading information about reproductive health.[9] Studies have also determined that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs actually increase risks of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections by discouraging contraceptive use.
• Based on the overwhelming body of evidence, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) has called for the termination of abstinence-only programs because they represented "poor fiscal and public health policy." Yet the Federal government has spent over $1 billion on programs that accomplish nothing and continue to advocate for increases. For the Fiscal Year 2007 has allocated $176 million through three separate funding streams for abstinence-only-until-marriage program.

The following medical and public health professional organizations solidly endorse providing comprehensive sex education that offers information about a range of sexual health and contraceptive options, including, but not limited to, abstinence for teenagers in their schools. [10,11,12,13]

• The American Medical Association
• The American Academy of Pediatrics
• The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists
• The American Public Health Association
• The American Psychological Association
• United States Surgeon General

1. National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, Sexual Behavior of Young Adolescents, 2003
2. APCO Insight & Advocates for Youth. Connecticut Sexuality Education Survey: Survey among Connecticut Residents. Washington, DC: Authors, January, 2004.
3. SIECUS, Public Policy Office State Profile, Connecticut, 2007
4. Kirby D (2001), Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
5. Starkman N, Rajani N. The case for comprehensive sex education. AIDS Patient Care and STDs. 2002;16(7):313-318.
6. Kirby D. What does the research say about sexuality education? Education Leadership. 2000;58(2):72-76.
7. Jemmott J, Jemmott L, Fong G. Abstinence and Safer Sex HIV Risk-Reduction Interventions for African American Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 1998;279(19):1529-1536.
8. "Impacts of Four Title V, Section 510 Abstinence Education Programs," by Christopher Trenholm, Barbara Devaney, Ken Forston, Lisa Quay, Justin Wheeler, and Melissa Clark
9. The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs prepared for Rep. Henry Waxman, United States House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, December 2004, page i.
10. Silva M. The effectiveness of school-based sex education programs in the promotion of abstinent behavior: a meta analysis. Health Education Research. 2002;17(4):471-481.
11. Siecus Public Policy Office. In Good Company: Who Supports Comprehensive Sexuality Education? Available at: http://www.siecus.org/policy/in_good_company.pdf. Accessed February 3, 2005.
12. Abstinence, monogamy, and sex [Editorial]. The Lancet. 2002;360(9327):97.
13. Wetzstein C. AMA revises sex-ed policy. Washington Times, 2004.