In many instances, the original articles' authors relied on secondary and tertiary sources, opinion pieces, editorials, and online magazines. When logic was applied at all, it was faulty. It resulted in an unsubstantiated smear of what they called "abstinence-only" education programs.

• This article examines the review articles that appear in the January 2006 issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health entitled, Abstinence and Abstinence-Only Education: A Review of U.S. Policies and Programs and Abstinence-Only Education Policies and Programs: A Position Paper of the Society of Adolescent Medicine, both written by a team of authors headed by John Santelli. Throughout the reviews, Santelli and his team make the claim that abstinence education (AE) programs are immoral, unethical, unscientific, ineffective, and contrary to human rights and public health principles. The Medical Institute for Sexual Health has evaluated the articles and found "a significant number of serious omissions, misrepresentations, deviations from accepted practices, and opinions presented as facts." The article here addresses the criticisms to AE programs, including a direct comparison between these programs and comprehensive sex education programs, which promote contraception. The authors go on to show that there is scientific evidence to support that AE programs have been effective in reducing pregnancy rates and sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and that abstinence education will continue to teach adolescents to practice risk avoidance rather than risk reduction (contraceptive use) so they can achieve the "highest attainable standard of health."¹

¹The Attack on Abstinence Education: Fact or Fallacy? Medical Institute for Sexual Health, June 2006.

Send Page To a Friend