2 of 2

It is not surprising, then, that the new study finds virginity pledges make little difference in the behaviors of religious teens with less permissive attitudes. In fact, the average age of sexual initiation for both the pledgers and non-pledgers in this study is 21, four years later than the average American teen. This is not an insignificant consequence, as the research suggests that abstinence at least through the teenage years is associated with a number of benefits, from reduced risk of physical and psychological harm to improved educational outcomes such as the greater likelihood of graduating high school.

From this perspective, the question of whether or not one act of public or written pledging during early adolescence changes behavior long term becomes less meaningful. Indeed, the more interesting question, one that researchers and the general public alike ought to ask, is this: What causes teens to be more pro-abstinence and anti-permissive? These attitudes and traits certainly do not occur spontaneously, especially considering the popular and media culture in which today's teens are immersed. Rather, they are taught and cultivated over time.

And this is the question with which many parents, religious youth workers, and abstinence educators grapple. They are concerned with fostering attitudes and behavioral traits that would lead teens to delay sex and to remain abstinent until marriage. Their focus is much more than just a simple "say no to sex" message. Instead, they emphasize character development and equip youth with invaluable life skills.

This question also reveals another misleading aspect of the study and the subsequent media coverage. The study attempts to assess the per se effect of virginity pledges — i.e., teens' self-reported response to a survey question about taking a public or written pledge to abstain from sex until marriage. It does not evaluate the effectiveness of virginity pledge curricula, religious youth programs, or abstinence education in general. Many of the non-pledgers in the study may very well have received some type of abstinence education, character development program, or religious teaching that influenced their behavior.

Thus, the study's findings do not merit the conclusion that these programs are ineffective. Nor do they justify a policy recommendation that abstinence education programs be abandoned. If anything, these new findings ought to prompt more urgent questions about the attitudes that can have an impact on teen behavior and what parents and churches can do to develop these qualities.

Christine C. Kim is Policy Analyst and Robert Rector is Senior Research Fellow in the Domestic Policy Studies Department at the Heritage Foundation.

Copyright © 2009 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

See Christianity Today's earlier coverage of the study, "Study: Abstinence Pledges Aren't Enough."

The study, by Janet Rosenbaum of Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health, appears in the January issue of Pediatrics journal.

Critiques of the media coverage of the study have appeared at GetReligion.org, The Wall Street Journal, and U.S. News & World Report.

first page |  2 of 2

share this page

January (Web-only) 2009, Vol. 53