Sex Education:
Abstinence vs. Condoms

An article in the May 20, 1998, edition of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram proclaimed "Condom facts help kids, study finds." That was the headline.

A study led by Princeton University psychologist John B. Jemmott III concluded that safe-sex lessons that center on condom use rather than abstinence are more effective at preventing children from engaging in sexual activity.

"We have to begin earlier to give the children the kind of information they need to protect themselves," Jemmott said in the article written by the Associated Press.

It’s shocking, isn’t it? A closer look at the information provided in the article leads me to a radically different conclusion than that reached by Jemmott and the writer of the Star-Telegram’s headline.

The findings of the study

The study was conducted in Philadelphia using 659 sixth- and seventh-graders at three inner city schools. The youths were divided into three groups: one received sex education concentrating on condom use, another focused on abstinence, the third was a control group who heard information regarding non-sexual diseases.

After three months, 12.5 percent of those in the abstinence group said they had sexual relations. 16.6 percent of those in the condom group said they had engaged in sex.

At six months, "slightly more of the abstinence-group students were having sex than the condom-group students," according to the article.

After one year, 20 percent of the abstinence group reported having sex, compared with 16.5 percent of the condom group.

At each checkpoint, between 20 and 23 percent of the control group said they had engaged in sex.

Important note concerning the study

Notice that after three months, the abstinence-based education seemed most effective. However, because the percentage of that group that had sex continued to increase, the authors of the study ruled that condom education is more effective.

Also, the .1 percent decline in the condom group represents less than one-fourth of a student! In other words, the number and percentage of students having sex in the condom group remained unchanged.

Why did abstinence work for only a short time?

It’s simple really. It’s about self control.

The authors of the study lumped abstinence and condoms into the same category, when really they cannot be. It requires no sustained self control to use a condom, but abstinence is nothing but self control.

This is the major flaw in the study. Self control is something that CANNOT BE TAUGHT! Even the moral philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas explained that a person could know what is right and still not do it. He taught that individuals must have the virtue of prudence to do what is right. Prudence is gained only through practice – doing the right thing over and over.

It is easy to tell kids not to have sex, but instilling in them the virtues and ability to make that correct choice is much more difficult. It takes practice, patience and continued support. Self control cannot be explained and instilled in students in a brief explanatory session.

Condom-based education, on the other hand, tells students that lack of self control is okay. It says it’s okay to have sex, just put this on first.

The fact that the number of students in the condom group having sex did not change indicates to me that the condom-based education had no real effect on their choice to have sex or not. The fact that the abstinence program worked for a short time indicates that it did have some effect, but that it was not followed up with support from parents, teachers and peers.

Why abstinence should always be taught

Abstinence should be the basis for all sex education of the youth. The reason for this is simple. Abstinence is the only foolproof way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and pregnancy. YOU CAN’T GET PREGNANT OR AN STD IF YOU DON’T HAVE SEX!

Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop recognized this. In a television advertisement emphasizing the importance of condoms, the Surgeon General says that the best way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases "barring abstinence is the use of a condom." Notice, condoms are SECOND best!

It’s interesting that educators place a different emphasis on sex education than on many other areas of academia. Teachers have decided to teach the "second-rate" way of doing things rather than the best way. The reason they often give is "kids are going to have sex anyway."

When nutrition is taught, teachers still focus their attention on the four basic food groups. They do not let the fact that kids like and eat junk food dissuade them from teaching the importance of a balanced diet.

Kids are still taught how to read, even though many rarely do at home. Teachers do not give up on reading and teach the kids how to turn on a television set or introduce them to books on tape.

In algebra, kids are still taught the most effective way to solve equations. We do not teach them shortcuts that work on some problems, but not on all.

That’s what condom-based education is. Condoms are not 100 percent effective. Abstinence is. The fact that some kids will have sex anyway should not affect the curriculum. Abstinence must be taught and REINFORCED! If it works at three months, find a way to make it stick at six and stay at 12.

Chris Mosmeyer
May 25, 1998