Here an article on Bush's no sex until marriage program
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18093769/

WASHINGTON - Students who participated in sexual abstinence programs
were just as likely to have sex a few years later as those who did not,
according to a long-awaited study mandated by Congress.

Also, those who attended one of the four abstinence classes reviewed
reported having similar numbers of sexual partners as those who did not
attend the classes, and they first had sex at about the same age as
their control group counterparts — 14.9 years, according to Mathematica
Policy Research Inc.

The federal government now spends about $176 million annually on
abstinence-until-marriage education. Critics have repeatedly said they
don’t believe the programs are working, and the study will give them
reinforcement.

However, Bush administration officials cautioned against drawing
sweeping conclusions from the study. They said the four programs
reviewed — among several hundred across the nation — were some of the
very first established after Congress overhauled the nation’s welfare
laws in 1996.

Not like vaccines
Officials said one lesson they learned from the study is that the
abstinence message should be reinforced in subsequent years to truly
affect behavior.

“This report confirms that these interventions are not like vaccines.
You can’t expect one dose in middle school, or a small dose, to be
protective all throughout the youth’s high school career,” said Harry
Wilson, the commissioner of the Family and Youth Services Bureau at the
Administration for Children and Families.

For its study, Mathematica looked at students in four abstinence
programs around the country as well as students from the same
communities who did not participate in the abstinence programs. The
2,057 youths came from big cities — Miami and Milwaukee — as well as
rural communities — Powhatan, Va., and Clarksdale, Miss.

The students who participated in abstinence education did so for one to
three years. Their average age was 11 to 12 when they entered the
programs back in 1999.

Mathematic then did a follow up survey in late 2005 and early 2006. By
that time, the average age for participants was about 16.5. Mathematica
found that about half of the abstinence students and about half from the
control group reported that they remained abstinent.

“I really do think it’s a two-part story. First, there is no evidence
that the programs increased the rate of sexual abstinence,” said Chris
Trenholm, a senior researcher at Mathematica who oversaw the study.
“However, the second part of the story that I think is equally important
is that we find no evidence that the programs increased the rate of
unprotected sex.”

Trenholm said his second point of emphasis was important because some
critics of abstinence programs have contended that they lead to less
frequent use of condoms.

Mathematica’s study could have serious implications as Congress
considers renewing this summer the block grant program for abstinence
education known as Title V. The federal government has authorized up to
$50 million annually for the program. Participating states then provide
$3 for every $4 they get from the federal government. Eight states
decline to take part in the grant program.

Some lawmakers and advocacy groups believe the federal government should
use that money for comprehensive sex education, which would include
abstinence as a piece of the curriculum.

“Members of Congress need to listen to what the evidence tells us,” said
William Smith, vice president for public policy at the Sexuality
Information and Education Council of the United States, which promotes
comprehensive sex education.

“This report should give a clear signal to members of Congress that the
program should be changed to support programs that work, or it should
end when it expires at the end of June,” Smith said.


Now here's questions for Social Conservatives.... How can you defend a
program that has the same results as the group who didn't go through
that program? What maybe expand the program until they get out the
school system and then they're on there own? Will their absteinace only
education protect them every time when they have unprotected sex?

People learn social behavior from their family, friends, and peers. Not
from educational institutions.

Only politicians would be stupid enough not to realize that I guess.

and corrupt enough to design a funnel for your tax dollars for a
ridiculous program.......ok ....8am i need coffee firsst.lkjgltbio;h

well i am a social consevative to an extent, i do not defend this study
or the idiots who wasted tax money to do it, sounds like someone needed
a job and knew someone in congress, this is silly.

Just how detached from reality does a person have to be

to believe...

I'm going to say something to someone that's going to defeat the primary
directive of the entire evolutionary process.



Ya, ok dude.

In all fairness, abstinance programs have proven effective in other
countries. It isn't that they don't work.... it's that the ones *we* try
don't work. Of course, safe (safer- any at all caries some risks) sex
education is always the best bet.

Poetnartist from which country does abstinance only programs work? Can
you quote a news source with a link?

Well, Australia was having quite a bit of success with theirs. And
Canada's doing ok. Better than ours, at least. Japan and the UK are
about as effective as ours. Other countries don't have cohesive
abstinence programs with enough study value. But I'll have to hunt down
the links.

And like I said- "safe sex" education programs are more effective, by
far, at least in the sence of preventing STDs and pregnancy.

May I ask Poet where you got your information from pertaining to
abstinance studies in Australi? I would be most interested to read the
information that you have....

For I have not heard of any such study here, in the past ten
years...doesn't mean it hasn't happened, just not in Queensland..

Jess ...they must be doing these studies in Tasmania.

Not much abstinence around the rest of the country as far as I can
see.

Fascinating stuff....do they mean people, or was that the tasmanian
tiger????

Cause that was effective...

Jess...you're bad!

Yes The Tasmanian tiger is extinct now....so it definately was
affective.

Imagine if it was people, young people in Australia, being
abstinant.....is there a ceiling on age????

And is there a loophole with the marriage thingo, cause here in
Australia, abstinance till marriage, would go down like a lead
balloon..

Besides which our government now pays $4000 for a baby born.
This seems to be most appealing to our young 16yr old single mums.See
them at any big shopping mall peddling from under the baby,s pram.

Sorry. I'm not in the habit of getting my news off the internet. So I'm
at something of a loss as to how to even start the process. I did find
this one neat article. Who'd have thought Uganda, of all places, would
pull off an extremely effective abstinance program.

Can't find the ones I cited. But I did find one that's working. Go
figure.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/oct/05101404.html

Poet, we all receive information from different mediums, it is just you
were citing that these programmes were effective in AUstralia, and young
people is my work, and from a government paid position.

It is part of my job to know of these thiings, these programmes, so you
surprise me when you mentioned it was effective here in Australia...

As rivame mentioned it is contradictory to the Federal Govenment
initiative to populate Australia, through monetary initiatives to have
babies, in the long term hope of meeting the shortfall of taxpayers to
support the large population of baby boomers, who will be retiring from
the workforce over the next 20 years..

Hmm. Maybe I got Australia wrong, then. It was a while ago- they were
citing defences for instituting all these abstinance programs (or
maintaining them that still existed) by bringing up the fact that it
worked in other countries. Coulda swore australia was on the list. Guess
I was wrong. Maybe they said "Austria" and I heard it wrong. I know the
UK was. I'm also quite sure Uganda wasn't.