States rejecting federal sex-ed grants

In an emerging revolt against abstinence-only sex education, states are turning down millions of dollars in federal grants, unwilling to accept White House dictates that the money be used for classes focused almost exclusively on teaching chastity.

In Ohio, Gov. Ted Strickland said that regardless of the state's sluggish economic picture, he simply did not see the point in continuing to take part in the controversial State Abstinence Education Grant program, which is managed by a unit of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Five other states — Wisconsin, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Montana and New Jersey — either have dropped out of the program or plan to do so by the end of the year.

Strickland, like most of the other governors who are pulling the plug on the funding, said in pulling out of the program last month that it had too many restrictions and rules to be practical. Among other things, the money cannot be used to promote condom or contraceptive use, and requires teachers to emphasize ideas such as that bearing children outside of wedlock is harmful to society and "likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects."

And, according to the governor's spokesman, Keith Dailey, Strickland sees little evidence that the program has been effective.

"We've spent millions of dollars on such education since Ohio first started getting grant money in 1998," Dailey said. "If the state is going to spend money on teaching and protecting kids, the governor believes it's better to spend it in a smarter, more comprehensive approach."

That states are walking away from such funding alarms abstinence-only groups, who insist that cutting off this source of revenue will close dozens of nonprofit sex-education groups — and undermine the progress they have made to fight teen pregnancy and curtail the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

States have used the money to help public and private schools start and run educational programs, to develop classroom instruction for nonprofit groups, and to pay for advertising and other media campaigns.

"There are kids who don't want to know how to put on a condom because they don't want to have sex," said Leslee Unruh, president and chief executive of the South Dakota-based National Abstinence Clearinghouse, the nation's largest network of abstinence educators. "So why can't kids who want to abstain have equal time, funding and education in the classroom as kids who are having sex?"

To critics, the policy shift addresses growing concerns that sexually active youth are not getting access to medically accurate information about use of contraceptives and disease prevention.

In an Oct. 3 report that surveyed abstinence programs in 10 states, the Government Accountability Office concluded that such programs have not worked, and at times offer medically inaccurate information about condoms and AIDS.

The report found that in one instance, materials used in the class "incorrectly suggested that HIV can pass through condoms because the latex used in condoms is porous." In another program, kids were wrongly taught that "when a person is infected with the human papilloma virus, the virus is 'present for life.' "

"Just saying no is not working," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, which advocates comprehensive sex education, including contraceptive information. "These are efforts by the federal government to fund ideological programs, not health-care or medical programs."

White House support for the so-called Title V grant remains strong.

In a federal budget that is tight for nearly everything but entitlements, homeland security and funding for the military effort in Afghanistan and Iraq, President Bush has asked Congress to carve out $191 million for the program in fiscal 2008, an increase of $28 million over current funding.

The push for the program comes amid a steady decline in teen pregnancies in the U.S.: Between 1995 and 2002, teen-pregnancy rates dropped by 24 percent, according to study conducted by Columbia University and the Guttmacher Institute. The report, published in the January issue of the American Journal of Public Health, found that 14 percent of the decline was a result of teens waiting longer to have sex, while 86 percent was due to use of contraception.