NEW STUDY: Most of Our Parents, even Grandparents Had Pre-Marital Sex
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Tue, January 02, 2007
- Viewed 72
- (22) comments so far
Finer is a research director at the Guttmacher Institute, a private New York-based think tank that studies sexual and reproductive issues and which disagrees with government-funded programs that rely primarily on abstinence-only teachings. The study, released Tuesday, appears in the new issue of Public Health Reports.
The study, examining how sexual behavior before marriage has changed over time, was based on interviews conducted with more than 38,000 people — about 33,000 of them women — in 1982, 1988, 1995 and 2002 for the federal National Survey of Family Growth. According to Finer’s analysis, 99 percent of the respondents had had sex by age 44, and 95 percent had done so before marriage.
Even among a subgroup of those who abstained from sex until at least age 20, four-fifths had had premarital sex by age 44, the study found.
Finer said the likelihood of Americans having sex before marriage has remained stable since the 1950s, though people now wait longer to get married and thus are sexually active as singles for extensive periods.
The study found women virtually as likely as men to engage in premarital sex, even those born decades ago. Among women born between 1950 and 1978, at least 91 percent had had premarital sex by age 30, he said, while among those born in the 1940s, 88 percent had done so by age 44.
“The data clearly show that the majority of older teens and adults have already had sex before marriage, which calls into question the federal government’s funding of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for 12- to 29-year-olds,” Finer said.
Under the Bush administration, such programs have received hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding.
“It would be more effective,” Finer said, “to provide young people with the skills and information they need to be safe once they become sexually active — which nearly everyone eventually will.”
Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, defended the abstinence-only approach for teenagers.
“One of its values is to help young people delay the onset of sexual activity,” he said. “The longer one delays, the fewer lifetime sex partners they have, and the less the risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease.”
He insisted there was no federal mission against premarital sex among adults.
“Absolutely not,” Horn said. “The Bush administration does not believe the government should be regulating or stigmatizing the behavior of adults.”
Horn said he found the high percentages of premarital sex cited in the study to be plausible, and expressed hope that society would not look askance at the small minority that chooses to remain abstinent before marriage.
However, Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America, a conservative group which strongly supports abstinence-only education, said she was skeptical of the findings.
“Any time I see numbers that high, I’m a little suspicious,” she said. “The numbers are too pat.”
Leslee Unruh, who runs a South Dakota-based organization promoting abstinence-only education, contended that increasing numbers of young people were open to remaining chaste until marriage.
SOURCE: Fox News
HT to: Cafe Kudzu
For Discussion: Do you believe these numbers?
More than nine out of 10 Americans, men and women alike, have had premarital sex, according to a new study. The high rates extend even to women born in the 1940s, challenging perceptions that people were more chaste in the past. "This is reality-check research," said the study's author, Lawrence Finer. "Premarital sex is normal behavior for the vast majority of Americans, and has been for decades."
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Daniel on Tue, January 02, 2007
Brian,
Thanks for your thoughts. You’re right. Parents are (or should be) the source of good sex ed, and making a wise and informed decision about schooling certainly follows from this. The NEA sounds like it has some silly people (with silly assumptions) in it.
Oh, and I tend to share your eschatological opinion. http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/wink.gif
Thanks for the conversation,
-Daniel-
Pastor Chris on Wed, January 03, 2007
Here’s another way to think about complete sex education. “We’re giving you the whole scoop, now, because you want to know now and you’ll need to know eventually. We want to demystify this sex business to make it easier for you to postpone sexual activity because that’s good for your mental and physical health and besides many of you and your parents believe that teenagers shouldn’t be having sex for moral reasons. We want to give you the whole scoop on sex because we want you to trust us, your teachers and parents and adults in general. And we trust you, to take this information and do what is right. “ (and in religious contexts, continue with the religious message)
Brian on Wed, January 03, 2007
Very interesting, Chris!
Let me chew on that a while!
Brian
Pastor Chris on Wed, January 03, 2007
I think that the trust issue is key, especially in light of this new study, which teens are going to know about. I remember, for instance, watching 60’s era school health class movies on drug use with contempt, as I was aware of how many falacies there were in the hype. I myself wasn’t tempted to abuse drugs, but if I had had problems that way, the last person I would have gone to is anyone associated with those stupid movies…I knew that the adults around me were clueless and therefore, I thought, useless to me on that subject. Teens, of course, are particularly allergic to clueless adults and adults who lie to them, and there is more than some sex education out there which does that. It backfires.
Camey on Thu, January 04, 2007
Personally, I do not believe that either parents alone or the public or private education system alone is the best.
I believe it is IMPERATIVE for the church to be involved in talking with children, teens and young adults about sex.
You are welcome to join me in discussing this more in the forums section, here: SEX and the church!
Peter Hamm on Thu, January 04, 2007
YES, Camey. We MUST! i’ve gotten in trouble for doing this with youth in the past, and I would do it again!
Camey on Thu, January 04, 2007
Sorry to hear you got in trouble, Peter. Glad to hear you’d do it again!
What saddens me greatly? There are girls and guys who truly believe that as long as they don’t have *intercourse* - they are sexually pure. Or if they just “do it once” - it’s really no big deal. I know a few who still have on their “True Love Waits” rings who have had sex but still think they’ve stood by their commitment to stay sexually pure. Why? They had no intentions of being serious with the person in which they had sex with. They merely “hooked up.”
There are also girls and guys out there who believe that once they’ve “sinned” sexually, that they are no longer welcome inside the walls of their church. Or they still come to church but keep their secret to themselves thinking that no one would understand.
In the fall of 2005, I was a discipleship leader for a group of 15-year old girls. Before our very first session, I told each of their parents exactly what information I would be sharing with their teen. Part of that being that I had sex as a teen and what consequences I had to face because of it. No, I did not end up pregnant or with a sexually transmitted disease.. but still consequences nevertheless. The parents were RELIVED to hear that I would be sharing this information with them because they did not want to talk about sex with their daugthers. Their 15-year old daugthers….... Their daughters were grateful that an adult in the church actually confessed to having premarital sex. One night - a few months later - one of the girls got her self into a compromising position. She called me and ended up not going thru with it. She knew that what I had shared I had done so because of my love for Christ and for those girls. I was not proud about it - just willing to be honest in an effort to help them not commit the same sin I had. Or that if they did, they knew they weren’t alone and that I still loved them as did Christ. There was hope.
I understand that talking about such things makes more people uncomfortable than comfortable. That’s exactly why a group like I now lead is more rare than common. It saddens me that there are so many out there who might not ever know of God’s redeeming love because the very ones who could reach out to them in truth and love - don’t. They simply say, “Not in MY church.”
Page 2 of 2 pages < 1 2
Post a Comment