Supporters of abstinence only education have chalked a new study by John B. Jemmott III, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania as a win in their column. The study, published in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, compared the delay of sexual activity amongst students who participated in four different curriculums: abstinence only, safe sex, comprehensive, and a generic health class. The abstinence only portion proved to be the most successful. After two years, 67% of the students had abstained from sex as opposed to 58% of the students who learned a comprehensive curriculum.
Though many supporters of abstinence only education view this study as indisputable evidence of its efficacy, there is reason to be skeptical. First, one study does not undo the multiple studies that prove abstinence only to be ineffective. It is important to note that this particular study is very different from traditional abstinence based curricula. It doesn't teach misleading information like "condoms don't work" nor does it use a moralistic tone to convey its message. In fact, the purpose of the curriculum is to delay sex until "you are ready" rather than until marriage. This curriculum wouldn't even have been eligible for Bush era funding for abstinence based programs and very likely would be eligible for Obama's pregnancy prevention funding as it is medically accurate.
