1. No category

Abstinence-Only Education
Abstinence-Only Education
The sole purpose of abstinence-only education is to promote abstinence from sex until marriage.
Abstinence-only programs teach the social, psychological, and physical benefits of abstaining
from sexual activity, and alternately the harmful effects of engaging in sexual activity outside of
marriage1. These programs teach that sexual activity between two (heterosexual) married people
is the only normal and expected sexual activity.2 Abstinence is touted as the only certain method
of avoiding sexually transmitted illnesses (STIs) and having out-of-wedlock children.3 Lastly,
abstinence-only programs teach tactics for rejecting sexual advances and emphasize that
everyone should be self-sufficient before engaging in sexual activity (this has been interpreted as
financial4 self-sufficiency).5
Federal Sources of Abstinence-Only Education Funding
In 2012, programs providing abstinence-only curriculums received$55 million in federal
funding.6 Between 1996 and 2007, Congress funneled over 1.7 billion state and federal dollars to
abstinence-only programs.7 While there was a recent lapse in Title V funding for abstinence-only
education (see below for a more detailed discussion of Title V), the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (ACA), which passed in March 2010, extended the program for five years.
The ACA provides $50 million each year for states to continue abstinence-only education.8 In
2010, 29 states were grantees of the abstinence education funds, and in 2011, 34 received federal
abstinence-only funding.9 The ACA also provides $75 million per year over five years for sex
education programs that promote personal responsibility. 10 These curriculums are teach both
abstinence and contraception as methods to prevent pregnancy and STIs and use material that
is evidence-based, age-appropriate, and medically accurate.11
The Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP), part of the ACA, provides $75 million
between 2010 and 2014 to teach about abstinence, contraception, and STIs.12 Additionally,
programs funded by PREP must cover at least three topics about transitioning into adulthood –
such as forming healthy relationships, adolescent development, financial literacy, educational
and career success, and healthy life skills. 13 Forty-three states applied for PREP funding in
2010.14 PREP’s funding levels are divided into Tier 1 for the replication of evidence-based
programs and Tier 2 for innovative approaches,15 with 31 programs meeting the criteria for the
former.16 For example, ¡Cuídate!, a program culturally and linguistically tailored for Latino
youth has been shown to result in more consistent condom use.17 The Children’s Aid Society Carrera Programs recruits underprivileged preadolescents for their seven year program that
offers comprehensive sexual education while also emphasizing academic and extracurricular
development. It was found to result in female participants being significantly less likely to report
having been pregnant or being sexually active.18
Title V of the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
(PRWORA): In 1996, Congress allocated $50 million per year in federal funds for
abstinence education as part of “welfare reform” legislation. 19 To receive Title V funding,
states must match every four federal dollars with three state-raised dollars and use the
money to follow an eight-point definition of abstinence-only education. The eight points
required to be covered in abstinence-only education are defined under Title V § 510(b). 20
The funding also requires programs to emphasize that “a mutually faithful monogamous
relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of all human sexual activity”
and that “sexual activity outside the context of marriage is likely to have harmful
psychological and physical effects.”21 As of July 2009, 25 states and Washington D.C. have
rejected Title V funding, a growing trend.22
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.
Abstinence-Only Education
Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA): Conservative lawmakers enacted AFLA to
encourage “chastity” and “self-discipline” among U.S. teenagers.23 Under AFLA, the
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) grants over $13 million per year to
abstinence-only education programs.24 Since 1997, DHHS has required AFLA programs to
comply with Title V’s eight-element definition of “abstinence education.”25
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Act (TANF)/Title V: TANF, better
known as the 1996 “welfare reform,” added Title V, Section 510 to the Social Security Act.
Title V established a new funding stream to provide grants to states for abstinence-onlyuntil-marriage programs.26 Abstinence-only programs receiving Title V funds must, in
addition to meeting other requirements, emphasize that a mutually faithful monogamous
relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of sexual activity.27
Other Sources: Additional funding goes to abstinence-only education under the guise of
STI/AIDS prevention or through earmarks for state abstinence-only programs.28
Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program: In April 2012, Heritage Keepers Abstinence
Education became the first abstinence-only program to qualify for the Obama
Administration’s science-driven, $75 million Teen Pregnancy Prevention fund.29 Presenting
an unpublished study by Salt Lake City researchers, Heritage Keepers met the Health and
Human Services’ requirement for a strongly designed study showing a statistically different
impact on student behavior.30 The legitimacy of the study’s results have been contested 31 and
some have criticized the program’s subject matter for excluding LGBT youth and using fear
and shame.32 For example, the Heritage Keepers Handbook warns that, because males are
visually stimulated, girls “need to be careful with what they wear, because males are
looking!” and “have a responsibility to wear modest clothing that doesn't invite lustful
thoughts.”33
State Legislation Regarding Abstinence-Only Education
As of March 2012, 21 states and the District of Columbia require that students in public schools
receive instruction on sex education, including HIV education. 34 Thirty-three states and the
District of Columbia require education about HIV and AIDS, but not necessarily sex education.35
Parental consent is required before children are allowed to participate in sex education
programs in three states; thirty-five states and the District of Columbia allow parents to opt-out
on behalf of their children.36
In California, school districts that provide sex education for students from kindergarten
through twelfth grade must ensure that the instruction is medically accurate, factual,
objective, and age-appropriate.37 Abstinence is introduced as one of various methods of
preventing pregnancy and STIs in the seventh grade. 38
Oregon law39 requires that public schools teach comprehensive sex education in all public
elementary and secondary schools and present information on the prevention of pregnancy
and STI’s in a way that alleviates scientifically unjustified fears. 40
Washington law41 requires scientifically accurate and age-appropriate instruction that is
suited for all students regardless of gender, race, disability status, or sexual orientation.
Additionally, abstinence may not be taught to the exclusion of other methods of preventing
pregnancy and transmission of STIs.42
Laws requiring that public schools teach comprehensive sex education are pending in New
York and Pennsylvania as of June 2012.43
In early 2009, Florida introduced a bill that would have reformed sexual education to include
information about condoms, contraceptives, and STI prevention. The “Florida Healthy Teens
Act” was a response to studies finding that Florida ranked third in the number of teen births per
state in 2006, had more cumulative AIDS cases than 47 other states in 2007, and had more
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.
Abstinence-Only Education
abortions than 42 of 44 other reporting states in 2006. 44 In April 2010, the bill died in the PreK12 Policy Committee.45
The Effects of Abstinence-Only Education
No conclusive evidence exists to indicate that teens who participate in abstinence-only
programs abstain from intercourse longer than others.46
o In a study commissioned by Congress, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. found that
abstinence-only education does not decrease the likelihood that teenagers will have
sex.47 Nor does abstinence-only education increase the chance that sexually active
teens will use condoms.48
o A recent study of abstinence-only pledge-takers revealed that after five years, 82%
backed out of their pledge. 49 Those who have taken an abstinence pledge are just as
likely to contract STIs, but are 10% less likely to use a condom and 6% less likely to
use any form of contraception when compared to their non-pledging counterparts.50
Eighty-eight percent of teens who take a pledge of abstinence from sex before
marriage break that pledge.51
o The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), an
advocacy group that promotes comprehensive sex education, 52 found that students
who pledge abstinence are six times more likely to have oral sex and four times more
likely to have anal sex than their non-pledging peers.53 These at-risk teens are also
one-third less likely to use contraceptives if they do become sexually active.54
A 2004 Congressional review of three widely used curricula found pervasive factual
inaccuracies surrounding condom use, false information about the risks of abortion, blurring
of religion and science, and gender stereotypes treated as scientific fact. 55 In 2006, the U.S.
Government Accountability Office issued a statement to DHHS that federally funded
abstinence-only programs must provide medically accurate information about condom
effectiveness.56 The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) began requiring written
assurances from community-based grantees that their proposed materials were accurate in
2007, and that these assurances be signed by grantees of the State Program in 2008.57 The
ACF requires that states (1) explain how they verify the accuracy of their materials and (2)
have a research analyst and healthcare professional examine the materials. 58 The Office of
Population Affairs requires programs to submit reports on the extent to which their
strategies are having an effect on program participants 59
As of 2011, 47.4% of high school students have had sexual intercourse.60 By the age of 19, 7
out of 10 men and women have had sexual intercourse.61 41% of teens aged 18 to 19 have
little or no knowledge about condoms and 75% have little or no knowledge of the
contraceptive pill.62 A third of teens aged 15 to 17 have had no formal education on
contraceptives (38% of males compared to 40% of females).63 In 2009, 30.5% of Latino and
29.8 % of African-American teens did not use condoms or birth control pills, compared to
6.4 percent of white teens.64
o Each year, approximately 9.1 million 15- to 24-year-olds contract STIs, accounting
for almost one-half of the total new STIs occurring annually in the U.S.65 The Centers
for Disease Control & Prevention estimate that in 2009, 39% of all new HIV
infections occur among people aged 15-29, with the majority contracted through
sexual intercourse.66
o About 750,000 pregnancies occurred among U.S. women ages 15 to 19 in 2006.67
From 1990 to 2008, pregnancy among women aged 15-19 has declined from 117
pregnancies per 1000 women to 68 per 1000. Contraceptive use was responsible for
86% of the decline, while a decrease in sexual activity was behind only 14% of the
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.
Abstinence-Only Education
decline.68 The U.S. has the highest rate of teen pregnancy among developed
countries.69
Abstinence-only curricula perpetuate sexist, harmful gender stereotypes. Abstinence-only
programs often emphasize that girls dislike sex and charge them with helping curb boys’
rampant sexual impulses.70 One text instructs girls that it is their special burden to preserve
both their own mental wellbeing and their partner’s because by “asking herself what signals
she is sending [she] could save both sexes a lot of heartache.” 71
o Most abstinence-only curricula do not adequately address rape, sexual assault, or
coercion. Additionally, in teaching that girls have responsibility for controlling male
sexual urges, they offer excuses for sexual violence and promote victim-blaming
attitudes.72
o Abstinence-only texts commonly portray women as naturally submissive and
sexually passive, which contributes to social stigma relating to female sexual
agency.73 This increases the likelihood that girls will engage in risky sexual behavior
such as unprotected sex.74
Title V funding targets low-income populations, so abstinence-only programs have a
disproportionate impact on poor communities and young people of color. There is a
considerable overlap between these two communities as African American children are three
times more likely than white children to live in poverty.75 American Indian, Latino, and
Pacific Islander children are also more likely than white children to live in poverty. 76
Similarly, low-income schools can rarely afford to refuse resources provided by AFLA or
CBAE programs, increasing the odds that young people of color will receive inaccurate,
incomplete information about sex, contraception, and STIs.77
o Compared to white youth, young people of color experience higher rates of medical
indigence as well as financial, cultural, and institutional barriers to health care. 78
While young people of color are worried about contracting AIDS, studies show that
these concerns are dwarfed by greater worries about basic needs like housing, food,
transportation, and childcare.79 These factors contribute to the fact that only about
19% of white teens become pregnant, while 51% of African-American teens and 53%
of Latina teens become pregnant.80
CBAE guidelines, as rewritten in 2006, urge abstinent young people to avoid socializing with
sexually active peers, devalue single motherhood, and discourage contraceptive use. 81
Some abstinence-only proponents have touted a study released in February 2010 as support
for the idea that abstinence-only education is effective in preventing sexual activity among
adolescents.82 However, comprehensive sex education advocates have pointed out that the
abstinence-only program used in the study differed from the traditional format of
abstinence-only education in several significant ways.83 The program used in the study did
not take a moralistic tone, did not state that the abstinence needed to last until marriage,
and did not disparage the use of condoms.84 Comprehensive sex education advocates believe
that the promotion of abstinence until adolescents are ready for sex, as in the curriculum
used in the study, more closely supports the idea that abstinence can be used effectively as
part of a comprehensive sex education program.85
How do abstinence-only education programs affect LGBTQ youth?
Much of the abstinence-only curriculum marginalizes LGBTQ students by teaching that sexual
activity does not belong outside the context of a marriage and that its sole purpose is
procreation.
Since same-sex couples are prohibited from marrying in most states, this curriculum denies
the legitimacy of LBGTQ sexuality.86
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.
Abstinence-Only Education
Abstinence-only curricula fail to provide information to students about how to protect
themselves in same-sex sexual relationships, putting LGBTQ youth at heightened risk for
STIs and HIV/AIDS.87
The 2006 rewrite of the CBAE guidelines requires that programs define marriage “only as a
legal union between a man and a woman as a husband and wife.”88
Americans Support Comprehensive Sex-Ed
The vast majority of Americans support comprehensive, age-appropriate, medically accurate sex
and sexuality education.
Eighteen states require sex education curricula to be medically accurate and/or ageappropriate.89
Most parents of junior high school and high school students (93% and 91%, respectively) say
that sex education is a “very” or “somewhat” important part of a school’s curriculum. 90
Most parents of junior high school and high school students (88% and 85%, respectively)
believe use of and access to contraceptives are appropriate topics for sexuality education
programs in schools.91
Seventy-two percent of junior high school students’ parents and 65% of high school students’
parents want federal funding for “more comprehensive sex education programs that include
information on how to obtain and use condoms and other contraceptives” instead of funding
programs that teach “abstaining from sexual activity” as the only form of birth control.92
The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and
Gynecologists, and the American Medical Association all support teaching comprehensive
sex education rather than abstinence-only education.93
A number of major religious organizations also support comprehensive sexuality education.
The Episcopal Church USA,94 Presbyterian Church (USA), Unitarian Universalist
Association, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church, and Reform and
Conservative Judaism have all passed resolutions in favor of comprehensive sexuality
education in public schools.95
142
U.S.C. 710 (2008) available at Separate Program for Abstinence Education. SOC. SEC. ONLINE (May 7, 2012),
available at http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title05/0510.htm.
2 42 U.S.C. 710(b)(2)(D) (2008)
3 42 U.S.C. 710(b)(2)(C) (2008)
4 E.g., RELATIONSHIPS UNDER CONSTRUCTION , HOW RELATIONSHIPS UNDER CONSTRUCTION MEETS THE TITLE V DEFINITION
FOR ABSTINENCE EDUCATION at xii (2008) available at http://www.relationshipsunderconstruction.com/wpcontent/uploads/_pdf/titleV_Themes.pdf; See also Programs, RIVERSIDE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH,
http://www.rsbcihi.org/NativeChallenge/Programs/tabid/175/Default.aspx (last visited July 3, 2012)
5 42 U.S.C. 710(b)(2)(G) and 42 U.S.C. 710(b)(2)(H)
6 Sarah Kiff, Under Obama administration, abstinence-only education finds surprising new foothold, WASH. POST
May 8, 2012, available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/under-obama-administrationabstinence-only-education-finds-surprising-new-foothold/2012/05/08/gIQA8fcwAU_blog.html
7Brief History of Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Education, [hereinafter Brief Hist. of Abstinence Only]. NO MORE
MONEY FOR ABSTINENCE-ONLY-UNTIL-MARRIAGE EDUCATION (Nov. 2010),
http://www.nomoremoney.org/index.cfm?pageid=947.
8 NATI’L PARTNERSHIP FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIES, WHY THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT MATTERS FOR WOMEN: COMPREHENSIVE
SEX EDUCATION FOR TEENS (Mar. 2012), available at
http://www.nationalpartnership.org/site/DocServer/SEX_EDUCATION.pdf.
9FAMILY & YOUTH SERVICES BUREAU,
FY 2011 Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Grant Awards,
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb/content/docs/11-tpp.htm#abstinence, (last visited June 26, 2012).
10
11
Id.
Id.
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.
Abstinence-Only Education
Personal Responsibility Education Program, ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH,
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/1742-personal-responsibility-education-program-prep (last visited
July 3, 2012)
13 Id.
14 Id. (all except HI, IN, MN, NV, ND, TX, VA)
15 FY 2011 Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Grant Awards, US DEP’T OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES ,
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb/content/docs/11-tpp.htm#stateprep (last visited July 3, 2012) (displaying
full list of programs awarded PREP funds in 2011).
16 Teen Pregnancy Prevention & Personal Responsibility Education Program Grants by State, U.S. DEP’T OF HEALTH
& HUMAN SERVICES, http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/09/teenpregnancy_statebystate.html (last visited
July 13, 2012)
17 Office of Adolescent Health: Evidence Based Programs, U.S. DEP’T OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES,
http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/oah-initiatives/tpp/programs.html (last visited June 26, 2012)
18 Id.
19 Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, Pub. L. No. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2353 (1996).
20 42 U.S.C. § 510(b) (1996).
21 Maternal & Child Health Services Block Grant, 42 U.S.C. § 710(b)(2) (2008).
22 SIECUS, SEXUALITY EDUCATION AND ABSTINENCE-ONLY-UNTIL-MARRIAGE PROGRAMS IN THE STATES: AN OVERVIEW FISCAL YEAR 2010 EDITION (2009) available at
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1260.
23 Cynthia Dailard, Sex Education: Politicians, Parents, Teachers, & Teens, 4 THE GUTTMACHER REPORT ON PUBLIC
POLICY (Feb. 2001), http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/04/1/gr040109.html.
24 Naomi R. Shatz, Unconstitutional Entanglements: The Religious Right, the Federal Government, and Abstinence
Education in the Schools, 19 YALE J.L. & FEMINISM 495, 511 (2008) (outlining AFLA’s origin and application).
25 SIECUS, FEDERAL ABSTINENCE ONLY UNTIL MARRIAGE FUNDING , available at http://www.siecus.org/federalfunding
(last visited June 27, 2012).
26 ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH, THE HISTORY OF FEDERAL ABSTINENCE-ONLY FUNDING 2 (July 2007),
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/storage/advfy/documents/fshistoryabonly.pdf
27 SIECUS, FEDERAL ABSTINENCE ONLY UNTIL MARRIAGE FUNDING supra note 25
28 Id.
29 Sarah Kiff, supra note 6
30 Id.
31 MELISSA CLARK, ET AL., MATHEMATICA, IMPACTS OF THE HERITAGE KEEPERS® LIFE SKILLS EDUCATION COMPONENT FINAL
REPORT (Aug. 2007), available at http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/abstinence07/hk/report.pdf.
32 Debra Hauser, et al., He-Men, Virginity Pledges, and Bridal Dreams: Obama Administration Quietly Endorses
Dangerous Ab-Only Curriculum, RH REALITY CHECK (May 1, 2012 9:20 AM)
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/04/30/he-men-virginity-pledges-and-bridal-dreams-an-hhs-endorsedcurriculum
33 Id.
34 State Policies on Sex Education in Schools, NAT’L CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES, (Mar. 2012)
http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/health/state-policies-on-sex-education-in-schools.aspx.
35 Id.
36 Id.
37 Id., See also Cal. Educ. Code §§ 51930-51939 (West).
38 Id.
39 Id., See also Or. Rev. Stat. § 336.455
40 Id.
41 Id., See also Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.300.475
42 Id.
43 Id.
44 Matt Clark, POLL: Proposed Bill Would Bring Contraceptive Education to Schools, MARCO EAGLE, Feb. 25, 2009,
http://www.marconews.com/news/2009/feb/25/proposed-bill-would-bring-sex-education-middle-sch/.
45 H.B. 169, 2010 GEN. ASSEMB. REG. SESS. (FLA. 2010), available at
http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=4225.
46 Harmful Consequences, NO MORE MONEY FOR ABSTINENCE-ONLY-BEFORE-MARRIAGE EDUCATION ,
http://www.nomoremoney.org/index.cfm?pageid=951(last visited June 28, 2012).
47 CHRISTOPHER TRENHAM ET AL, MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH INC., IMPACTS OF FOUR TITLE V, SECTION 510
ABSTINENCE EDUCATION PROGRAMS, FINAL REPORT (Apr. 2007), available at http://www.mathematicampr.com/publications/pdfs/impactabstinence.pdf.
12
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.
Abstinence-Only Education
48
Id.
49 Rob
Stein, Premarital Abstinence Pledges Ineffective, Study Finds, WASH. POST, Dec. 28, 2008, available at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/28/AR2008122801588.html.
50 Id.
50 Study: Abstinence Pledges May Trigger Risky Sexual Behavior, USA TODAY, Mar. 18, 2005, available at
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-03-18-sex-study_x.htm.
52SIECUS, Position Statement,
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=494&parentID=472#sexuality education
(last visited June 26, 2012).
53 Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Q & A, SIECUS, available at
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewpage&pageid=522&grandparentID=477&parentID=523#Q3
(last visited June 28, 2011).
54 Id.
55 Heather D Boonstra, Advocates Call for a New Approach After The Era of Abstinence Only Sex Education, 12
GUTTMACHER POLICY REVIEW 9 (Winter 2009), available at
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/12/1/gpr120106.pdf.
56 ACLU, Press Release, ACLU Applauds GAO Letter in Support of Medically Accurate Sex Education for Teens (Oct.
19, 2006), available at: http://www.aclu.org/reproductiverights/sexed/27146prs20061019.html.
57 MARCIA CROSS, U. S. GOV’T ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE , ABSTINENCE EDUCATION: ASSESSING THE ACCURACY AND
EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS 4 (Apr. 23, 2008 )available at
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08664t.pdf.
58 Id.
59 Id at 5.
60 Sexual Risk Behavior: HIV, STD, & Teen Pregnancy Prevention, CTRS FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION (June
20, 2012), available at http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/sexualbehaviors/.
61 In Brief: Fact Sheet. GUTTMACHER INST (Feb. 2012), http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Teen-Sex-Ed.html.
62 Id.
63Id.
64 Samantha Caiola, Contraception Used By Less Minority Youth, THE CHICAGO REPORTER (May/June 2012), available
at http://www.chicagoreporter.com/news/2012/05/contraception-used-less-minority-youth.
65 Hillard Weinstock et. al., Sexually Transmitted Diseases Among American Youth: Incidence and Prevalence
Estimates, 2000, 36 PERSPECTIVES ON SEXUAL & REPROD. HEALTH (Jan./Feb. 2004), available at
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3600604.pdf.
66 HIV Among Youth, CTRS FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION (Dec. 2, 2011),
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/youth/.
67 GUTTMACHER INST., U.S. TEENAGE PREGNANCIES, BIRTHS, AND ABORTIONS: NATIONAL AND STATE TRENDS AND TRENDS BY
RACE AND ETHNICITY, at tbl. 2.1 (Sept. 2006), available at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends.pdf.
68 Facts on American Teens’ Sources of Information About Sex, THE GUTTMACHER INST. (Feb. 2012),
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Teen-Sex-Ed.html#12a.
69 NAT’L CAMPAIGN TO END TEEN PREGNANCY, TEEN BIRTH RATES: HOW DOES THE U.S. COMPARE? (2006), available at
http://www.theInfo.campaign.org/resources/pdf/TBR_InternationalComparison2006.pdf.
70 Jessica Valenti, Abstinence Double Standard Threatens Girls’ Health, ALTERNET (June 26, 2006), available at
http://www.alternet.org/story/37956/.
71 JULIE F. KAY, LEGAL MOMENTUM, SEX, LIES AND STEREOTYPES: HOW ABSTINENCE-ONLY EDUCATION HARMS WOMEN &
GIRLS 20 (2008), available at http://www.legalmomentum.org/assets/pdfs/sexlies_stereotypes2008.pdf.
72 Id.
73 Id.at 21.
74 Id.
75 Ethnic and Racial Minorities & Socioeconomic Status. AM. PSYCHOLOGICAL ASS’N.
http://www.apa.org/pi/ses/resources/publications/factsheet-erm.aspx (last visited June 28, 2012)
76 Id.
77 Risha K. Foulkes, Abstinence-Only Education and Minority Teenagers: The Importance of Race in a Question of
Constitutionality, 10 BERKELEY J. AFR.-AM. L. & POL'Y 3, 11 (2008).
78 JENNIFER AUGUSTINE, ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH, YOUTH OF COLOR - AT DISPROPORTIONATE RISK OF NEGATIVE SEXUAL
HEALTH OUTCOMES (Aug. 2010), available at
http://advocatesforyouth.org/storage/advfy/documents/youth_of_color.pdf
79 Id.
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.
Abstinence-Only Education
THE NAT’L CAMPAIGN TO PREVENT TEEN & UNPLANNED PREGNANCY, POLICY BRIEF: RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITIES IN
TEEN PREGNANCY (June 2010), available at
http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/resources/pdf/Briefly_PolicyBrief_RacialEthnicDisparities.pdf.
81 SIECUS, IT GETS WORSE: A REVAMPED FEDERAL ABSTINENCE-ONLY PROGRAM GOES EXTREME 6, available at
http://www.siecus.org/_data/global/images/Revamped_Abstinence-Only_Goes_Extreme.pdf(last visited June 28,
2012).
82 See JOHN B. JEMMOTT III, ET AL., EFFICACY OF A THEORY-BASED ABSTINENCE-ONLY INTERVENTION OVER 24 MONTHS,
ARCHIVES OF PEDIATRICS AND ADOLESCENT MED. (Feb. 2010), available at http://archpedi.amaassn.org/cgi/content/short/164/2/152?home; James Tillman, WISCONSIN Senate Passes Bill Banning AbstinenceOnly Education in Schools, LIFE SITE NEWS, (Feb. 2010)
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/feb/10020112.html.
83 Jack Mohr, The Real Scoop on the (In)Effectiveness of Abstinence-Only, NATIONAL SEXUALITY RESOURCE CENTER,
(Feb. 2010) http://cregs.sfsu.edu/article/abstinence_only.
84 Robin Marty, Roundup: Abstinence Study Fall Out, RH REALITY CHECK (Feb. 2, 2010 9:57AM), available at
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2010/02/02/roundup-abstinence-study-fall-out.
85 Id.
86 Julie F. Kay, supra note 71 at 12
87 Id.
88SIECUS, supra note 52, at 7.
89 NAT’L CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES, supra note 33.
90 KENNEDY SCHOOL OF GOV’T, HARVARD UNIVERSITY SURVEY, SEX EDUCATION IN AMERICA: GENERAL PUBLIC/PARENTS,
NAT’L PUBLIC RADIO/KAISER FAMILY FOUND. (Jan. 2004), available at http://www.kff.org/newsmedia/upload/SexEducation-in-America-General-Public-Parents-Survey-Toplines.pdf.
91 Id. at 10.
92 Id. at 7.
93 Member Organizations, NAT’L COAL. TO SUPPORT SEXUALITY ED., http://www.ncsse.com/index.cfm?pageid=932(last
visited June 28, 2012).
94 RELIGIOUS COAL. FOR REPROD. CHOICE PRO-CHOICE AMERICANS SPEAK OUT, available at
http://www.rcrc.org/pdf/new_just_say_know.pdf (last visited June 28, 2012).
95 Id.
80
Copyright ©2012 Law Students for Reproductive Justice. All rights reserved.