Spare_change
Gold Member
- Jun 27, 2011
- 8,690
- 1,293
- 280
The Trump administration recommended a $100-million-per-year federal grant program with the purpose of preventing teen pregnancy be defunded after it showed lackluster results. Media outlets are not taking it very well.
Congress set up the program in 2010 to analyze and fund teen pregnancy programs that don’t focus primarily on avoiding sexual risk, which had been a policy priority in previous decades. Instead they could focus primarily on other things, such as teaching contraceptive use or encouraging implantation of long-acting contraception. The program was sold as something that would be evidence-based. Grants were subject to rigorous evaluations and a report, available on the Office of Adolescent Health web site, was released a few months ago.
Trump Cuts Wildly Ineffective Teen Pregnancy Program, Media Flip Out
Here are summaries of the results:
Youth who completed the program had sex and unsafe sex at similar rates as youth in an unrelated after-school program.
In the first year, students in the program were less likely to report having had sex. By the second and third year, they reported similar rates of sex and sex without a condom.
High school students in this program had similar rates of sexual activity and other related sexual risk behaviors as other students. But a couple of subgroups showed increases in sexually risky behavior after completing the program. Youth who had previously been sexually active were “significantly more likely” after this program to report having had recent sexual intercourse. White students in the program were significantly more likely to report having had oral sex and sex without a condom than those in a control group.
Students in the program had similar rates of sexual initiation, recent sex, and sex without birth control. By ninth grade, a higher proportion of youth in this program had initiated sex than youth in a standard educational program.
There were no differences for students in this program relative to a standard school health curriculum in rates of vaginal or oral sex initiation rates.
Students in this program had similar reported rates of sexual initiation relative to students who received general health education.
High school students in this program had similar rates of sexual activity and sex without a condom. A group at one of the sites in this program reported less sex.
Nine months after the program, adult females reported similar rates of sexual activity and sex without a condom as a control group. Youth in the program were less likely than youth in a control group to have had sex without a condom.
Adolescent girls reported similar rates of safe sex behavior relative to a group offered a video on safe driving. In addition, the study also found similar rates of pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection.
Immediately after the nine-month program, teens were less likely to report a range of sexual activity. Ten months later, there were no longer any differences.
Teens did not change their sexual behavior on sexual activity, sex without a condom, or initiation of sexual activity.
What the report shows is not a lot of bang for a tremendous number of bucks. In some cases, the grant programs for reducing pregnancy actually showed increases in reported pregnancy and the likelihood of becoming pregnant. Even for some programs that showed short-term positive results, the improvements usually disappeared within a few months.
In response to the weak evidence of positive effects, much less positive sustained impact, Health and Human Services recommended defunding the program after June 30, 2018. A non-profit news site called Reveal Newswrote a highly critical piece on the funding change, without mentioning the ineffectiveness of the programs. Many other media outlets followed suit, publishing one-sided stories that treated good intentions as sufficient proof of good-enough results for hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding. Some media outlets falsely stated that the funded teen pregnancy programs have been shown to be effective.
(OP Note: There's a list of 30 more just as bad, or worse in the original article)
Congress set up the program in 2010 to analyze and fund teen pregnancy programs that don’t focus primarily on avoiding sexual risk, which had been a policy priority in previous decades. Instead they could focus primarily on other things, such as teaching contraceptive use or encouraging implantation of long-acting contraception. The program was sold as something that would be evidence-based. Grants were subject to rigorous evaluations and a report, available on the Office of Adolescent Health web site, was released a few months ago.
Trump Cuts Wildly Ineffective Teen Pregnancy Program, Media Flip Out
Here are summaries of the results:
- Children’s Home and Aid Society of Illinois: Carrera Program
Youth who completed the program had sex and unsafe sex at similar rates as youth in an unrelated after-school program.
- Morehouse School of Medicine: Carrera Program
In the first year, students in the program were less likely to report having had sex. By the second and third year, they reported similar rates of sex and sex without a condom.
- Community Action Partnership Network of San Luis Obispo County, Inc/La Alianza Hispana, Inc./Touchstone Behavioral Health: Cuidate
High school students in this program had similar rates of sexual activity and other related sexual risk behaviors as other students. But a couple of subgroups showed increases in sexually risky behavior after completing the program. Youth who had previously been sexually active were “significantly more likely” after this program to report having had recent sexual intercourse. White students in the program were significantly more likely to report having had oral sex and sex without a condom than those in a control group.
- South Carolina Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy: It’s Your Game: Keep it Real
Students in the program had similar rates of sexual initiation, recent sex, and sex without birth control. By ninth grade, a higher proportion of youth in this program had initiated sex than youth in a standard educational program.
- The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston: It’s Your Game: Keep it Real
There were no differences for students in this program relative to a standard school health curriculum in rates of vaginal or oral sex initiation rates.
- Program Reach, Inc: PHAT! – AbstinenceOnly Intervention
Students in this program had similar reported rates of sexual initiation relative to students who received general health education.
- Better Family Life/San Diego Youth Services/Youth and Family Alliance (LifeWorks): Reducing the Risk
High school students in this program had similar rates of sexual activity and sex without a condom. A group at one of the sites in this program reported less sex.
- Knox County Health Department/County of Hennepin/Planned Parenthood of Greater Idaho: Safer Sex
Nine months after the program, adult females reported similar rates of sexual activity and sex without a condom as a control group. Youth in the program were less likely than youth in a control group to have had sex without a condom.
- Carnegie Mellon University: Seventeen Days
Adolescent girls reported similar rates of safe sex behavior relative to a group offered a video on safe driving. In addition, the study also found similar rates of pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection.
- Florida Department of Health: Teen Outreach Program
Immediately after the nine-month program, teens were less likely to report a range of sexual activity. Ten months later, there were no longer any differences.
- Hennepin County: Teen Outreach Program/It’s Your Future
Teens did not change their sexual behavior on sexual activity, sex without a condom, or initiation of sexual activity.
What the report shows is not a lot of bang for a tremendous number of bucks. In some cases, the grant programs for reducing pregnancy actually showed increases in reported pregnancy and the likelihood of becoming pregnant. Even for some programs that showed short-term positive results, the improvements usually disappeared within a few months.
In response to the weak evidence of positive effects, much less positive sustained impact, Health and Human Services recommended defunding the program after June 30, 2018. A non-profit news site called Reveal Newswrote a highly critical piece on the funding change, without mentioning the ineffectiveness of the programs. Many other media outlets followed suit, publishing one-sided stories that treated good intentions as sufficient proof of good-enough results for hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding. Some media outlets falsely stated that the funded teen pregnancy programs have been shown to be effective.
(OP Note: There's a list of 30 more just as bad, or worse in the original article)
