The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

Above: Barack Obama saying ‘people’s families are off limits’ yesterday in light of the news about Sarah Palin’s daughter being 5 months pregnant & unmarried.

& he’s right. The Palin family has an enormous burden as it is, & no candidate should exploit or make light of this issue. It’s a personal one.

But there is no doubt whatsoever that it is exactly what many Americans are talking about this week. It’s a shame that this ’soap opera’ element has been added, but there’s no denying it’s what people are talking about. I’ve barely been at work an hour & already I’ve had 3 people come up to me & ask me about it.

So how can this story add to the discourse? How can we view this not as a salacious issue, but bring it to relevance in whom we decide will move into the White House next January?

The issue of abstinence education.

I do know that Sarah Palin is an advocate for abstinence-only sex education. It is an issue that is in the GOP platform that was passed yesterday. It also happens to be a mistake.

In April of last year, a years-long Congressional study on the long-term efficacy of abstinence-only education was released:

“Authorized by Congress in 1997, the study followed 2000 children from elementary or middle school into high school. The children lived in four communities — two urban, two rural. All of the children received the family life services available in their community, in addition, slightly more than half of them also received abstinence-only education.

By the end of the study, when the average child was just shy of 17, half of both groups had remained abstinent. The sexually active teenagers had sex the first time at about age 15. Less than a quarter of them, in both groups, reported using a condom every time they had sex. More than a third of both groups had two or more partners.

…

The results came as a bit of surprise even to Christopher Trenholm, who supervised the project at Mathematica Policy Research Inc. An early analysis by his organization showed some attitude shifts toward delaying sex among students in the abstinence programs, but those differences disappeared as students got older. One thing they also learned, Trenholm said, was that kids receiving abstinence instruction did not use condoms less often than other kids, a possibility that critics occasionally raise. They also showed slightly better knowledge about the prevention of sexually transmitted disease.

Kids in both groups were knowledgeable about the risks of having sex without using a condom or other form of protection. Knowing that did not mean they put on a condom every time, however. Condom use was not high in either group; of those who had sex, almost half said they used condoms only “sometimes” or “never.”

Brown said Mathematica’s results underscore what other, smaller studies have shown: “The most effective programs are those that say abstinence is the best choice but birth control and protection are also worth knowing about.”"

I think too many critics of, if you’ll pardon the pun, ‘warts-&-all’ sex-ed get too caught up into believing that it’s a “sex-instruction” course.

But instead, these critics need to think of a comprehensive program in the same way that one views a hunter education course, or a drivers education course. (As a young man I happened to take all three, by the way). Those courses outline (in sometimes very graphic detail) what could happen if something goes wrong. & just like a hunting course would say that the best way to avoid a gun accident is not to pick up a gun in the first place, sex ed courses, while comprehensive, should also outline that the best way to avoid pregnancy or an STD is to avoid sex altogether.

It’s the proverbial hand in the cookie jar argument. Kids know that the cookie jar is there, & telling them “don’t go anywhere near this jar!” is not enough. Parents & educators need to explain exactly what happens should the cookie you choose turn out to be a wrong one.

That’s my take. What’s yours?

FURTHER READING:

“…talking about abstinence turns out to be easier than abstaining. More than 60 percent of high school seniors report having had sex at least once. The message that every family should take from Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is: It can happen here. “ - Ruth Marcus in the Washington Post

“…has the candidate made her relationship with her family an issue in the campaign — the answer is a qualified yes. While Palin has not really been a candidate long enough (she was anointed Friday) to have made much of anything an issue in the campaign yet, her “family values” positions are certainly among the principal reasons she was chosen by McCain. In fact in the speech announcing her selection, he called her emblematic of “the hopes and the values of working people.” So, an editor could make an argument that the “family values” issue makes a daughter’s teen pregnancy fair game in a presidential race.

Has the family member injected herself into the campaign? Absolutely not. Aside from a quick photo shot of Bristol, alongside her brother and sisters on the platform on Friday, I have not heard a word she’s uttered in support of her mother, McCain, the Republican platform or, for that matter, any public issue.

What is the nature of the indiscretion? A teen pregnancy out-of-wedlock. I don’t think this clears the bar for press exposure. In 2001, the 19-year-old Bush girls, Barbara and Jenna, received misdemeanor citations from the Austin, TX police for underage drinking. There were those at the time who felt it was unfair for the press to inquire about and probe the incident and the Bushes’ reaction. When law enforcement gets involved and there is a public record, the incident is fair game. When Andrew Giuliani put his name on a lawsuit against Duke University and filed suit, that is fair game for reporting. When a 17-year-old girl gets herself pregnant, I believe the press ought to stand down unless there’s an unusually good justification for publishing.

How old is the family member? 17. Would any parent out there want to be judged as fit or unfit for their job on the basis of the nutty or irresponsible stuff our kids do? Even the proudest of parents knows that we’re just a hair’s breadth away from potentially disastrous consequences — particularly with teenagers. This is not Billy Carter, or some other wacky adult relative who should be held responsible for his actions — this is a near-child, who made a stupid mistake and now will live with it. It is very different than a responsible adult relative who screws up and embarrasses the candidate (and almost always knows that they’re going to).

And finally, does the family member’s conduct shed any light on the fitness of the candidate to hold office or on the candidate’s morals, principles or values? The answer here is no. I am sure that in the days and weeks ahead there will be many things we learn about Sarah Palin that will make us acutely perplexed as to why John McCain thought she was the best possible option to be his second-in-command, but having a pregnant teenage daughter will definitely not be on the list. There are those that argue that having a teenage daughter get pregnant may be some reflection of her mothering skills, her attentiveness, her insight into her own family. I don’t buy it. And even were that so, it would not provide any window on her suitability for the office of vice president; it would only be a measure of her mothering.

The toughest ethical questions faced by journalists involve when to involuntarily strip subjects of their privacy over matters they do not want disclosed. Since privacy is one of the most cherished values in a civilized society, we in the press need to be absolutely sure that when we do it, we have some higher ethical justification. In this case, there was none.” - Ruth Hochberger, the Huffington Post

“Does her daughter’s pregnancy provide the opening Democrats need? It’s too early to say, but my guess is no. In fact, if anything, this storyline is likely to help the McCain/Palin ticket.

First, it will drive the ratings for Palin’s speech tomorrow night through the roof. I’ve been predicting that the tune-in for her speech would be second only to Obama’s “Night at the Parthenon” show. If the McCain campaign leaks word that Palin’s going to address her daughter’s pregnancy, she may surpass him.

Second, this story will appeal to the women voters Palin was always put on the ticket to target - not the hard-core Hillary Lefties, but the swing, suburban moms. Palin is never going to be popular with New York Times [NYT] feminists. Palin’s appeal is with working women who’ve had encounters with low-level sexism but, instead of whining about it, got back to work making happy, successful lives.

Her daughter’s pregnancy highlights another part of Palin’s appeal. Her normalcy. Here’s a woman who has run a business, raised a family, who is sending a son off to Iraq, who has another son with a disability, and now has to help her teenage daughter face motherhood. These are experiences that millions of American moms have shared, can relate to and understand.” - Michael Graham, the Boston Herald

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.