Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug;50(6):2321-2333.
doi: 10.1007/s10508-020-01867-9. Epub 2021 Feb 3.

The Effect of State-Level Sex Education Policies on Youth Sexual Behaviors

Danielle N Atkins  1 , W David Bradford  2
Affiliations

The Effect of State-Level Sex Education Policies on Youth Sexual Behaviors

Danielle N Atkins et al. Arch Sex Behav. 2021 Aug.

Abstract

Two types of sex education are generally offered in the U.S. abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education. There is no clear scientific consensus over which approach minimizes the risk of unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases for youth. While there have been many studies of specific programs in clinical or quasi-experimental settings, there are very few evaluations of how state-level sex education policies affect the youth population. We estimate the impact of various state-level sex education policies on youth sexual activity and contraceptive use using data from four waves of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System from 39 states. We found that states that require sexuality (sex and/or HIV/STD) education and contraceptive content or states that mandate education but leave the actual content up to local districts have lower rates of sexually active youth and higher rates of contraception use when youth are sexually active. States that require sexuality education and require abstinence content increase the rate at which youth are sexually active, and youth in those states are less likely to use hormonal birth control if they are sexually active. In conclusion, we found that state policies regarding sex and HIV/STD education had statistically significant effects that are meaningful in magnitude from a public health perspective.

Keywords: Sex education; Youth contraceptive use; Youth sexual activity; Youth sexual behavior.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Alford, S., Bridges, E., & Gonzalez, T. (2011). Science and success: Sex education and other programs that work to prevent youth pregnancy, HIV & sexually transmitted infecfions (p. 2008). Washington, DC: Advocates for Youth.
    1. Atkins, D. N., & Bradford, W. D. (2014). Changes in state prescription contraceptive mandates for insurers: The effect on women’s contraceptive use. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 46(1), 23–29. - DOI
    1. Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (1990). State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis. American Political Science Review, 84, 395–415. - DOI
    1. Bleakley, A., Hennessy, M., & Fishbein, M. (2006). Public opinion on sex education in US schools. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 160(11), 1151. - DOI
    1. Bleakley, A., Hennessy, M., Fishbein, M., & Jordan, A. (2009). How sources of sexual information relate to adolescents’ beliefs about sex. American Journal of Health Behavior, 33(1), 37–48. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources