A ten year study by Mathematica Policy Research Inc |
2 showed that abstinence only education was not more effective in preventing sex among students, and beyond that, other studies show it was ineffective at preventing unwanted pregnancies.
...[A] paper by researchers at Columbia University and the Guttmacher Institute, published in the January issue of The American Journal of Public Health, attributed 86 percent of the decline to greater and more effective use of contraceptives — and only 14 percent to teenagers’ deciding to wait longer to start having sex.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/28/opinion/28sat1.html
Study: http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/abstract/AJPH.2006.089169v1
14% versus 86%. The vast majority of people are going to have sex, eventually. They need to know what works. And it's not just unintended pregnancy. It's STD's as well.
As the APA puts it
Research shows that one in five adolescents will have sex before the age of 15 and most who continue to be sexually active do not use condoms consistently. Although some youth acknowledge their fears about HIV/AIDS, many do not perceive themselves to be at risk and lack accurate information about what circumstances put them at risk for HIV infection.
Over and over, we find evidence that comprehensive sex education is the only way to improve chances that those having sex, do it safely.
Texas continues to use an abstinence focused sex ed program. While Federal funding may require such a curriculum, how much is such an ineffective policy costing us in the long run? Be it in the health costs of mothers, or possibly the cost of the state raising foster children, sexually transmitted disease, or any other long term impacts that ineffective education may have.
On access to to alternative and emergency plans.
The Guttmacher Institute Ranked Texas very poorly in sexual health policies:
Among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, Texas ranked
* 43rd in service availability;
* 48th in laws and policies;
* 19th in public funding; and
* 45th overall.
Source: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/state_data/states/texas.htm
What's a straightforward way to help Texans gain access to reproductive health and treatment? For one, we could make sure that they have access to birth control
There have already been cases in Texas of a pharmacist refusing to dispense birth control on moral grounds, including "Plan B". And in at least one case, this was not in the usually expected case of condom failure, or other consensual actions, it was a the victim of a sexual assault.
Source: http://www.kvue.com/news/state/stories/020304kvueprotest-jw.7c050c55.html
Source: ocw.mit.edu
Some states (Wisconsin and Illinois among others) have already passed laws obligating a pharmacist to dispense prescriptions for birth control, clarifying existing laws obligating them to dispense prescriptions that would not cause harm to the patient. In other words, obligating them to do their jobs. And this is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
A November 2004 poll conducted by CBS News and the New York Times found that eight out of ten Americans believe that pharmacists should not be permitted to refuse to dispense birth control pills.
Source: http://www.cfpa.org/issues/issue.cfm/issue/PharmacistRefusals.xml#endnotes
By preventing access to birth control pills or Plan B on the grounds that they cause abortions (Which is patently untrue), they increase the rate of unwanted pregnancies, and therefore abortions.
Isn't Texas based on independence? Let the people own their own bodies, let them own the choices and consequences of what goes on with them.
No comments:
Post a Comment