Silver Ring Thing

In recent years, the government has increased funding to abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. It spends up to $167 million a year on abstinence only programs. Section 510(b) of Title V of the Social Security Act requires that those receiving money under the program meet a strict 8 point definition. It includes:

1. Have as its exclusive purpose teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity
2. Teach abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school-age children
3. Teach that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems
4. Teach that a mutually faithful, monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of sexual activity
5. Teach that sexual activity outside the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects
6. Teach that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society
7. Teach young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances
8. Teach the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity

One program that has flourished is the Silver Ring Thing program. It teaches the above 8 point definition and has its youth members swear to be abstinent until marriage. The program also teaches about condom use-sort of. They only teach the failure rate of condoms and do not teach how to use or obtain condoms. If asked how to use or get a condom, the instructors cannot say.

Although the program’s stated goal of encouraging young people to abstain from sex until marriage is honorable, many effects of the program are deleterious to young people. For instance, 88% of those who take the pledge fail and have sex about 18 months after taking the pledge. When those who do have sex finally do have it, they engage in more risky behavior. They tend to be more likely to try anal sex and oral sex as they believe they are technically keeping their virginity. Also, when the young people who have been instructed by such programs do have sex, they tend to have unprotected sex. This is because the programs teach that wearing condoms do not protect them from harm. They are also less likely to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases.

The State Of . . . Abstinence Only Programs seems to have a deleterious effect on more young people than it helps. Although the few who keep the pledge seem to turn out well, the great majority who have been taught by this program engage in behavior that is risky and dangerous to themselves and to the public health. Why the benefits of condom use and other contraceptives are prohibited is beyond belief. Shouldn’t children be exposed to both sides of an issue so as to make an informed decision? I think so. But decide for yourselves by reviewing the links above as well as a piece done by 60 Minutes, whose site also provides links to programs like the Silver Ring Thing. When it comes to the health of the general public and our young people, must we be blindly one sided?