Minnesota Department of Education Summary:
“This concerning number of increases in risk behavior (18 across 79 programs) raises the question of the possible influence of “risk compensation,” a phenomenon in which the perception of condoms as being highly effective would lead to increased risk behavior. Evidence for this has recently been documented in international school populations.74
Perhaps of equal importance, the credible scientific evidence reported here contradicts the oft-repeated claims that research shows abstinence education (AE) is ineffective and/or harmful.13 • 75 • 76 • 77 Seven studies judged to be of adequate scientific rigor by either UNESCO, the CDC, or HHS found that AE produced a long-term delay in sexual initiation (three of these also found long-term reductions in sexual activity by sexually experienced teens). The rate of AE success was about one of two (47%) and the rate of harmful impact (6%) was about what could occur by chance. And there was strong evidence (nine studies) negating the concern that AE does harm by reducing the use of condoms.
Given the claims cited above, it may surprise some people that this database appears to show better evidence for AE than for CSE in U.S. schools. This is especially noteworthy considering the markedly fewer number of available AE studies, and the fact that unlike the CSE results, most of the AE evidence was produced by independent evaluators. The amount of evidence of effectiveness appeared somewhat greater for AE than for CSE in U .5. schools (seven AE studies vs. three CSE studies) and the success rate for AE programs (47%) appeared to be much higher than that of school-based CSE (15%).”
——
“It might be worth your time to search “oppose” to see what opposition there is to the proposed health standards.”