According to the study, which focused on the use of federal funds to promote abstinence-based sex ed as compared to the results of the 2003 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, the number of Indiana youth who are sexually active is skyrocketing as sex ed teaching practices become more restrictive. Indiana is one of only five states — with Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina and Oklahoma — that requires that abstinence be taught in sex ed classes, yet the state has experienced a 5 percent increase in sexuality among high schoolers over the last year — the largest increase in the nation.

The push for abstinence-based sex education became a nationwide issue in 1996, when Congress designated $250 million (to be spent over five years) for programs that stress abstinence from sexual activity until marriage and make no mention of contraceptive devices or birth control. Though some state officials were concerned over whether these guidelines were too restrictive, all 50 states and the District of Columbia applied for funding.

Today, some educators across the state are calling for reform measures to change the way Indiana educates students about sexual health. “We hope this document will help educators, policymakers, community leaders and parents understand what Indiana’s young people are, and in many cases are not, learning with respect to sexual health,” said Kathleen Baldwin, vice president of education and training for Planned Parenthood of Greater Indiana. “The SIECUS study is part of an increasing body of evidence that shows that abstinence until marriage education has, at best, no impact on helping teens delay intercourse and use contraception.”

Advocates of abstinence education disagree. Groups such as the National Abstinence Clearinghouse cite other statistics that point to a similar failure among condom-based education programs, as well as lower pregnancy rates among teens who take virginity pledges. Leslee J. Unruh, president of NAC, issued the following statement in response to the SIECUS study: “If SIECUS is honestly motivated by the health of our nation’s children, why would they be opposed to sharing the best way of protecting the next generation from hurt and disease? It is time to question the motives of SIECUS … are they honest about anything?”

One solution that seems to placate both sides of the sex education argument is peer education. Already a fixture in five cities across Indiana, peer education is an abstinence-based program that still provides comprehensive information about alternatives and safer sexual practices. This program uses specially trained teen-agers between the ages of 14 and 17 to teach other teens about sexual issues, allowing freer communication without the embarrassment of talking to an authority figure about such sensitive topics.

For more about the study: www.siecus.org/policy/states/Indiana.pdf.