Study: Higher teen birth rates for schools giving free condoms
Saturday, June 18, 2016|
The latest research out of the University of Notre Dame shows that schools distributing free condoms to students have teen birth rates that are 10 percent higher than schools that don’t.
The comparison was revealed in a new study conducted by Notre Dame’s Kasey Buckles and Daniel M. Hungerman, who contrasted teen births at schools that freely give students condoms to those where teenage girls had no school condom programs … as well as to slightly older girls in the same locale. At the schools that distributed free condoms, some provided counseling on contraceptive methods, while others did not.
After analyzing the results, the researchers divulged that teen girls attending schools that administer free condom programs experience 10-percent higher birth rates than expected — a trend that was especially evident at schools that gave out condoms without any instruction or advice.
Sex ed sexualizes teens
According to Ascend — an organization formerly known as the National Abstinence Education Association — the results from the study came as little surprise. They arrived in the wake of other research Asend conducted revealing that more than 20 percent of teens say that their sex education classes on contraceptive use made them feel that they were expected to have sex.
Ascend President and CEO Valerie Huber explained that the aforementioned survey her organization conducted in partnership with the Barna Group divulged that two times the number of males — compared to females — came away from condom demonstrations at schools with the message that they were expected to have sex.
“If condom demonstrations have that impact in a classroom, condom distribution in the school is going to have at least that same kind of effect,” Huber told LifeSiteNews. “We’re not surprised that it would encourage sexual activity.”
Another expert on the matter stresses that the Notre Dame study “breaks new ground,” due to the fact that there has been a dearth of research on high schools’ condom distribution programs — when compared to studies conducted on the impact of oral contraceptives at schools.
“The research design is comprehensive and analyzes the impact of 1990s-era condom distribution programs in a number of large public school districts, including Baltimore, Los Angeles, Seattle and Washington, DC,” leading social scientist Dr. Michael J. New explained to LIfeSiteNews. “The results provide strong evidence that condom distribution programs increase teen fertility rates by approximately 10 percent.”
Instead of protecting students — as those behind school sex education programs proclaim — it is noted that such progressive instruction worked into curricula has the adverse effect.
“Overall, this study adds to a substantial body of research, which shows that efforts to encourage contraception use through legalization, distribution or subsidies are ineffective at best — or counterproductive at worst,” New contends. “Even the [Leftist] Guttmacher Institute acknowledges that availability of the birth control pill in the 1960s led to higher rates of teen sexual activity.
He says that prematurely sexualizing teens through so-called sex education is witnessed around the world.
“Furthermore, another Guttamcher study found simultaneous increases in contraceptive use and abortion rates in the United States, Cuba, Denmark, Netherlands, Singapore and South Korea,” New added.
Sending the wrong message
With many parents being led to believe that sex education at schools is being implemented to help their children become make safe and informed about their own sexuality, it is argued that public schools are teaching students to become more irresponsible.
“[School programs that] normalize teen sex [and imply] sexual activity is a normal part of adolescent development, [combined with] condom distribution within even the class or maybe in the school clinic [mean schools are] tacitly saying and sometimes explicitly saying, ‘Hey, as long as you use this, you don’t have to worry about any of the consequences,’” Huber insists.
The pro-family leader maintains that the misleading message that teen pregnancies and the contraction of sexually transmitted diseases will not happen to them — in addition to the fact that underdeveloped adolescent brains are incapable of making fulling rational decisions — work together to create the “perfect storm” that can devastate the lives of teens.
“[The national conversation on sex education] centers around sound bites rather than fact,” Huber points out.
The pro-abstinence advocate stresses that as the dangers and little-talked-about casualties of the problematic public sex education programs continue to wreak havoc on America’s youth, a growing number of schools are becoming interested in providing instruction on avoiding sexual risk — as opposed to programs geared toward normalizing teen sex and focusing on contraceptive distribution.