Abstaining from the Truth

In the early days of my blogging and reading other people's blogs, back in early 2005, my friend Nonna blogged about the abstinence education in Texas that had proven unsuccessful. In a comment to Nonna I cited a Swedish article on the topic, "Living in celibacy easier said than done":

"More and more Americans promise to abstain from sex before marriage, zealously supported by President Bush. But only every tenth keeps his/her promise.

Solemn promises of a life in celibacy until your wedding day ought to be quite difficult to demand of the drinkers at the clubs in Stockholm - and of the rest of Sweden. Statistics show that young Swedes on average make their sexual debut at 16. In the USA however, there is a nation-wide movement to persuade the youngest to practise abstinence. President Bush supports the work and Congress has assigned 131 million dollar to abstinence teaching. As a rule the debated is conducted with Christian characteristics. But the problems with teenage abortion, spread of HIV, and STDs have made a great deal of people outside of church listen. Since 1993 the movement True Love Waits has alone convinced 2,4 million young Americans to sign a promise of chastity:

'As a believe that true love waits, I commit before God, myself, my family, those I date and my future partner to remain sexually untouched until the day I enter into marriage'.

The effectiveness of the abstinence model is however strongly questioned by scientists. And many sexuality specialists believe that medical arguments can make more people wait than can promises to God. Especially if the promises are not kept anyway.

A new scientific report from the University of Columbia shows that 88 % of those who have given a promise of celibacy have not kept it. The frequency of STDs among these people was just short of as high as among those who had not promised to abstain. Those who broke their promises, quickly came even with the promise-free group by having many partners in a short period of time.A study at the A&M University in Bush's homestate Texas has showed a similar result. Among teenagers who have been taught abstention, the number of people making their sexual debut following the end of the course increased, in particular among the boys. The many young people getting pregnant in the USA are petitioned more and more firmly by abortion opponents. Around the country these organisations offer free ultrasounds in order to persuade women to reassess. Spokesmen claim that up to 90 % of these women have abandoned the thought of abortion after having undergone these examinations.

The abortion advocates accuse these clinics for leading the women to continue their pregnancies. At the same time these women do no get any information about contraceptives. Instead they are encourage to - exactly - abstain from sex."

I just read another article on the subject (from October 2007), by Amanda Robb at the New York Times, titled "Abstinence 1, S-Chip 0"

"DEMOCRATIC leaders are right to contest President Bush’s veto of their bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance program. But sadly, their “bipartisan compromise” will leave millions of young Americans vulnerable to sickness and suffering of the most preventable kind.

To entice Republicans to support the bill, the House of Representatives agreed to increase money for abstinence-only sex education by $28 million, to a total of about $200 million a year. Abstinence-only courses, the only form of federally financed sex ed, teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to cause psychological and physical harm. If that were true, our health care system would be not only broken, but besieged. A 2002 survey found that 93 percent of American adults had had premarital sex by the age of 30.

In addition to provoking shame about a nearly universal activity, abstinence-only sex education is ineffective and dangerous. Last April, a 10-year study found that students who took abstinence-only courses were no more likely to abstain from sex than other students. Previous studies revealed that abstinence-only students avoid using contraception.

Programs in public schools teach patently false information like 'the chances of getting pregnant with a condom are one out of six' and H.I.V. 'may be in your body for a long time (from a few months to as long as 10 years or more) before it can be detected.'

The results are tragic. The United States has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the developed world (about the same as Ukraine’s), and the highest abortion rate in the Western world. Sexually transmitted infections like syphilis and gonorrhea are on the rise for the first time since the 1980s, and chlamydia is being diagnosed twice as often as it was a decade ago.

Among Americans living in poverty — those who might see the $4 price of a three-pack of condoms as the take-home pay for an hour of work at minimum wage — the unintended pregnancy rate has increased 30 percent since 1994. Our teenage pregnancy and abortion rates have declined during the last decade, but research suggests this is mainly because of increased use of condoms, something young people must learn about outside of school.

By dropping the financing for abstinence-only sex ed, Congress could save enough money to insure 150,000 children a year. And it would also demonstrate much needed resolve to protect all aspects of children’s health."

I can't believe that in 2008 some people still have such old-fashioned views and are turning a blind eye to the evidence and the social reality around them. Scary.

Abort now!*

* i.e. stop this development now

I'm a bit worried by the latest developments on the issue of abortion in the EU. European Parliamentary Forum (EPF) has just published a new survey of European parties' view on abortion, which concludes that 36 out of 75 parties, mainly Social Democrat, Liberal and Left parties, are in favour of the right to abortion. EPF defined this as "still big support for" the right to abortion, as some of the parties that don't specifically express the right to abortion in their party manifesto implicitly support the right, but to me, that isn't good enough. Actually I don't know what the views of the party was last year or five years ago or ten years ago, but it feels like people are questioning this fundamental right for women to decide over their own body.

Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden are some of the countries where there is broad consensus on the right to abortion (though one wonders sometimes what the Swedish Christian Democrats really think), while parties in Ireland, Poland and the UK are more divided. For example, in the UK there are differing opinions within the Labour party if the right to abortion on socio-economic grounds should be extended or restricted.

24 of the 75 surveyed parties want to reduce the number of abortion, which is not obviously the same as wanting to ban them, but it depends how (and why) you want to reduce them. The Swedish Christian Democrats, Liberals, the Centre Paty and the Left party belong to this category although the Christian Democrats want to restrain the grounds for the right to abortion. I can also support measures that reduce the number of abortions if these concentrate on the causes of unwanted pregnancies, increasing access to and use of contraceptives and discouraging the use of abortion as a type of contraceptive, but any means that try to limit women's right and access to abortion is really a no-no for me. I think it's probably safe to say that countries where abortion is banned or restricted have as high number of abortions as countries where access is free, and more women in dying in the process.

Some facts about the right to abortion in the EU
Completely free until at least twelve weeks into pregnancy: Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Czech Republic, Germany and Hungary
Allowed on socio-economic grounds (also to save the women's life and on physical and psychological grounds): Cyprus, Finland, Luxembourg and Great Britain
Allowed only to protect physical health: Poland
Allowed only to protect mental health: Spain, Northern Ireland
Allowed only to save the woman's life: Ireland

Sources: Europaportalen and Political Party Mapping by European Parliamentary Forum on Population and Development