This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (25)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Medical Practice  • Health Policy  • Men's Health  • Men's Contraception  • Patient Education/ Health Literacy  • Adolescent Medicine  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Amy Bleakley, PhD, MPH; Michael Hennessy, PhD, MPH; Martin Fishbein, PhD

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160:1151-1156.

Objective  To examine US public opinion on sex education in schools to determine how the public's preferences align with those of policymakers and research scientists.

Design  Cross-sectional survey.

Setting  July 2005 through January 2006.

Participants  Randomly selected nationally representative sample of US adults aged 18 to 83 years (N = 1096).

Main Outcome Measures  Support for 3 different types of sex education in schools: abstinence only, comprehensive sex education, and condom instruction.

Results  Approximately 82% of respondents indicated support for programs that teach students about both abstinence and other methods of preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Similarly, 68.5% supported teaching how to properly use condoms. Abstinence-only education programs, in contrast, received the lowest levels of support (36%) and the highest level of opposition (about 50%) across the 3 program options. Self-identified conservative, liberal, and moderate respondents all supported abstinence-plus programs, although the extent of support varied significantly.

Conclusions  Our results indicate that US adults, regardless of political ideology, favor a more balanced approach to sex education compared with the abstinence-only programs funded by the federal government. In summary, abstinence-only programs, while a priority of the federal government, are supported by neither a majority of the public nor the scientific community.

Author Affiliations: Annenberg Public Policy Center, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Comprehensive Sex Education: Strong Public Support and Persuasive Evidence of Impact, but Little Funding
Douglas Kirby
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160(11):1182-1184.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Parents' Concern About Their Own and Their Children's Genetic Disease Risk: Potential Effects of Family History vs Genetic Test Results
Tarini et al.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2008;162:1079-1083.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Focus-on-Teens, sexual risk-reduction intervention for high-school adolescents: impact on knowledge, change of risk-behaviours, and prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases
Gaydos et al.
Int J STD AIDS 2008;19:704-710.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Politics and Nursing Science: Not Always A Healthy Combination
Roye
Nurs Sci Q 2008;21:13-17.
 

Politics, Parents, and Prophylaxis -- Mandating HPV Vaccination in the United States
Charo
NEJM 2007;356:1905-1908.
FULL TEXT  

Comprehensive sex education: strong public support and persuasive evidence of impact, but little funding.
Kirby
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2006;160:1182-1184.
FULL TEXT