some sort of sexual experience. Yet increasingly, because of legislation encouraging "abstinence-only-until-marriage" sex education programs, American youth are without the knowledge to make informed and safe decisions about sex.

Claims of efficacy by proponents of abstinence programs, Sarah Goff argues, are based on research that "relies on short-term data, such as the number of teenagers who have signed pledges to abstain from sex." The medical and scientific communities are unanimously against such programs. According to the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), "[e]very reputable sex-ed organization in the U.S., as well as prominent health organizations including the American Medical Association, have denounced abstinence-only sex ed…" The National Institutes of Health concludes "legislation discouraging condom use on the ground that condoms are ineffective…" ignores scientific evidence and places policy over health concerns.

The Kaiser Family Foundation shows that 88 percent of those who signed so-called "virginity pledges" had sex before marriage, but were less likely to be tested for STDs. The NCAC states that HIV rates for American adolescents are higher than in any other developed nation, as well as the teen pregnancy rate. This is despite increased funding for abstinence-only programs in the past 20 years, and, according to data from a survey by the Family Planning Perspectives cited by the NCAC, a rise from 2 percent of teachers teaching abstinence only to prevent pregnancy in 1988 to 23 percent in 1999.

For their protection, Sue Alford posits that teenagers "need to know how to avoid the potential negative consequences of sexual intercourse." Restrictions on frank discussions of sexuality and information about condoms and contraceptives are detrimental. Youths have oral or anal sex, thinking that they will remain "virgins" and are protected from pregnancy and STDs. Legislation may seem to indicate otherwise, but, according to a Kaiser study referred to by the NCAC, a majority of parents support comprehensive sex education including discussions of "contraception and condom use, sexually transmitted disease, sexual orientation, safer-sex practices, abortion, communications and coping skills, and the emotional aspects of sexual relationships." Comprehensive sex education that allows "students to practice communication and negotiation skills," according to William R. Finger, "…can result in young adults delaying first intercourse or, if they are already sexually active, in using contraception…"

Abstinence-only programs deny the sexual awareness of adolescents and teens. Blocking access to pertinent material, rather than providing comprehensive sex education, increases risks.

Resources
Alford, Sue. "The Problems with Abstinence-Only Sex Education." Teens and Sex. Ed. Myra H. Immell. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2002.
Finger, William R. "Sex Education Has Succeeded." Sex Education. Ed. Kristen Bailey. At Issue Series. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005.
Goff, Sarah. "Advocates of Abstinence Education Are Hypocrites." Sex Education. Ed. Kristen Bailey. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005.
Kaiser Family Foundation. "Teenage Virginity Pledges Are Not Working." Teen Sex. Ed. Christine Watkins. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005.
National Coalition Against Censorship. "Abstinence-Only Sex Education Endangers Students." Teen Sex. Ed. Christine Watkins. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005.

---