Teen Birth Rates Fall in 2008 After Two Year Increase, Abstinence Credited

  • Thread starter Thread starter juliee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

juliee

Guest
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) – Teen birth rates fell in 2008 after increasing during the two years prior, the Centers for Disease Control said today, and backers of abstinence education credit their programs as making an impact.

The CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics reported today that the full birth rate fell two percent in 2008.

LifeNews.com/nat6225.html
 
Keep in mind that the “morning after” pill is much more easily obtainable now, so it is easier for a teen to go in and request this easy abortion than it was before.

Look at the whole picture.

Sure - abstinence education helps, but loose laws allowing easy access to abortion and birth control also bring the teen birth rates down as well.

~Liza
 
Oh come on, we all know that abstinence education doesn’t work. We need to give kids condoms, RU-486, and teach them that morality, chastity, decency and modesty are irrelevant to life and happiness. Get with the program people!!!

By the way people-I’m kidding.

I’d like to think that abstinence education is helping more than easy aces to abortion-let’s try to be positive people!
 
…and this in a country where contraception isn’t available? NO.
 
Abstinence, is good, I think it’s even better when combined with very good across the spectrum sex ed, access to contraception and parents that only explain the values they have but are living examples each and every day.
 
Rascalking said:
I’d like to think that abstinence education is helping more than easy aces to abortion-let’s try to be positive people!
Click to expand...
I prefer to be realistic. Sorry if that rains on your happy parade. But looking only at one aspect of the situation does not tell the entire story, and leads people into a false sense of security that the status quo is acceptable or working, when in reality it’s not even close.

~Liza
 
Lutheranteach said:
Abstinence, is good, I think it’s even better when combined with very good across the spectrum sex ed, access to contraception and parents that only explain the values they have but are living examples each and every day.
Click to expand...
Actually the co called comprehensive sex edcuation(the so called abstinence plus) are less effective than abstinence only programs.
 
lizaanne said:
I prefer to be realistic. Sorry if that rains on your happy parade. But looking only at one aspect of the situation does not tell the entire story, and leads people into a false sense of security that the status quo is acceptable or working, when in reality it’s not even close.

~Liza
Click to expand...
There is no eveidence that the morning after pill has reduced teen pregnancy. There is lots of evidnece that abstinence only programs do.
 
estesbob said:
There is no eveidence that the morning after pill has reduced teen pregnancy. There is lots of evidnece that abstinence only programs do.
Click to expand...
That is because no one is required to track how many babies are killed by this method. Only surgical abortions are tracked.

Of course there can be no evidence when none is collected. But you can’t be truly honest with yourself if you think that making this form of abortion easily available to teens is not going to impact the number of live births.

~Liza
 
lizaanne said:
That is because no one is required to track how many babies are killed by this method. Only surgical abortions are tracked.

Of course there can be no evidence when none is collected. But you can’t be truly honest with yourself if you think that making this form of abortion easily available to teens is not going to impact the number of live births.

~Liza
Click to expand...
So one hand we have peer reveiwed studies and the other hand we have your opinion. Are we to base the edcuation of our children on solid science or opinion and acedotal evidnece?
 
estesbob said:
Actually the co called comprehensive sex edcuation(the so called abstinence plus) are less effective than abstinence only programs.
Click to expand...
It’s pretty easy to see why this might be true. What good is abstinence education, if in the next breath, you make it clear that you don’t expect them to be abstinent?

Too many adults are thinking (and telling kids) that it’s impossible to get through (jr.) high school without having sex. It is possible; the vast majority of kids (or at least girls) did it for centuries. I think the biggest problem is that our expectations are too low, so kids live down to them.

However it’s impossible to know for sure what the cause of the teen birth rate decline is. If we had a record of how many teens got the morning-after pill, it wouldn’t help because we wouldn’t know how many were pregnant when they took it.

–Jen
 
estesbob said:
So one hand we have peer reveiwed studies and the other hand we have your opinion. Are we to base the edcuation of our children on solid science or opinion and acedotal evidnece?
Click to expand...
Are you totally denying the fact that the morning after pill is more readily available than ever to teens?

Are you totally denying the fact that non surgical abortions are not tracked?

Are you totally disbelieving that having easily available chemical abortion would not impact the number of live births?

God gave me intellect - I would certainly hope that others also use their own intellect to look beyond studies and statistics and put pieces of reality together (in addition to the data) to form a more full and complete picture. To do otherwise is to be lead by the nose through life, believing only what studies, science, and media reports have to tell you.

I prefer not to live that way.

And where in the world did you ever read in any one of my posts that I would ever suggest to base the education of children on anecdotal evidence??!! :confused: Talk about making things up!!! :rolleyes:

~Liza
 
lizaanne said:
Are you totally denying the fact that the morning after pill is more readily available than ever to teens?

Are you totally denying the fact that non surgical abortions are not tracked?

Are you totally disbelieving that having easily available chemical abortion would not impact the number of live births?

God gave me intellect - I would certainly hope that others also use their own intellect to look beyond studies and statistics and put pieces of reality together (in addition to the data) to form a more full and complete picture. To do otherwise is to be lead by the nose through life, believing only what studies, science, and media reports have to tell you.

I prefer not to live that way.

And where in the world did you ever read in any one of my posts that I would ever suggest to base the education of children on anecdotal evidence??!! :confused: Talk about making things up!!! :rolleyes:

~Liza
Click to expand...
You suggest abstinence only studies are flawed because of the morning after pill (MAP) is available, yet offer no evidence to support that.

If the MAP was the cause then we should have seen similar drops in teen pregnancies among both groups of teens-those who receive abstinence only edcuation and those who receive “comprehensive” sex edxuation. In fact it the MAP were the cause of the drop we should have seen a greater drop in pregnancies among those reveicving comprehensive sex edcuation since they are given more info on contraception-yet just the opposite is true. The greatest drop in pregancies was among those receiving abstinence only instruction. Why is this? Could it be that when you tell chidren that they can have sex without consequaences as long as they take a pill the next day they are more likely to have sex?
 
estesbob said:
You suggest abstinence only studies are flawed because of the morning after pill (MAP) is available, yet offer no evidence to support that.
Click to expand...
You are a professional at putting words in people’s mouths. Please do show me where I have said this.

Again - I’ll try this one, more, time.

All I am saying is that the studies are only one piece of the picture. And to consider the entire situation in a realistic light one has to also look at what the studies are NOT telling you.
If the MAP was the cause then we should have seen similar drops in teen pregnancies among both groups of teens-those who receive abstinence only edcuation and those who receive “comprehensive” sex edxuation. In fact it the MAP were the cause of the drop we should have seen a greater drop in pregnancies among those reveicving comprehensive sex edcuation since they are given more info on contraception-yet just the opposite is true. The greatest drop in pregancies was among those receiving abstinence only instruction. Why is this? Could it be that when you tell chidren that they can have sex without consequaences as long as they take a pill the next day they are more likely to have sex?
Click to expand...
Again - putting words in mouth - my goodness, this is getting tiring. :rolleyes:

I never said that the MAP was the cause - I said it is part of the whole picture. Not sure why you can’t get this.

~Liza
 
lizaanne said:
You are a professional at putting words in people’s mouths. Please do show me where I have said this.

Again - I’ll try this one, more, time.

All I am saying is that the studies are only one piece of the picture. And to consider the entire situation in a realistic light one has to also look at what the studies are NOT telling you.

Again - putting words in mouth - my goodness, this is getting tiring. :rolleyes:

I never said that the MAP was the cause - I said it is part of the whole picture. Not sure why you can’t get this.

~Liza
Click to expand...
So -how do you thik the Astros are going op do this year?
 
estesbob said:
So one hand we have peer reveiwed studies and the other hand we have your opinion. Are we to base the edcuation of our children on solid science or opinion and acedotal evidnece?
Click to expand...
Well if you accept peer reviewed studies then i take you also accept the condoms drastically reduce teen pregnancy?
 
estesbob said:
archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/164/2/152?home

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR2010020102628.html

ncregister.com/register_exclusives/abstinence_education_works_for_high-risk_youth/
Click to expand...
That is an interesting study.

I would like to mention a few things about it. First of all, the 2 groups involved were abstinence only and something that didn’t promote abstinence at all. From my knowledge, the sex ed programs at schools now are a mix of both abstinence and safe sex (with an emphasis on abstinence). I might be wrong about that, but I believe that is how they are. So, it isn’t just comparing abstinence only to what we have now, it is comparing abstinence only to another extreme.

Also, I would like to point out that there is definitely an incentive to lie about having sex if you are in the abstinence only group. Think about a 14 year old girl that was taught she shouldn’t be having sex for two years, but did anyway. Then think about what she is going to put on a survey about it…there is a good chance she will lie and say she didn’t have sex. This wouldn’t be the same in the group that heard only safe sex, because they were not told they shouldn’t be having sex at all, so why lie about it?

So, in my opinion, the study is probably not that accurate. I am SURE that there are far more qualified people that have looked at the study and made similar judgments about it. This is just basic statistics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top