Should MCPS distribute condoms? Adam Stella says NO: More effective means needed

by Adam Stella

(article originally printed in the May 25, 2000 issue of Silver Chips)

The ethics of condom distribution are debatable. But based on factual evidence, the matter becomes incontrovertible. The goals of condom distribution, to decrease teenage pregnancy and the promulgation of sexually transmitted diseases, have not been achieved. Furthermore, condom distribution has the negative effects of encouraging sexual activity among teenagers and promoting confidence in a method of birth control particularly susceptible to human error.

The primary objective of condom distribution programs is to decrease the alarmingly high rate of teenage pregnancy. In practice, the outcome has been quite the opposite. A 1993 study by Family Planning Perspectives of high schools in St. Paul, Minnesota, before and after the introduction of a condom distribution program, graphically illustrates this misconception. Instead of reducing the number of teenage pregnancies, the program witnessed a one third increase in pregnancies within two years of the program¹s implementation.

The findings may seem to be counter intuitive, but the combination of factors that led to the increase in pregnancy reveals the flaws in condom distribution programs. Coupled with adolescents¹ increased likelihood of incorrect condom use, which has been proven in other studies, condom distribution becomes potentially disastrous.

Despite evidence that condom distribution promotes teenage sex, proponents suggest that condom distribution programs decrease teenage exposure to sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). However, once again, the argument is based on a fallacious assumption.

A study by the American Journal of Public Health examined ten Seattle high schools that had introduced condom distribution in order to increase condom use among sexually active students. Those who ran the program were disappointed to learn that condom use among the students at these high schools remained the same as before the implementation of the program.

Montgomery County¹s exclusion of condom distribution from the Health Education curriculum can be attributed to similar conclusions. "The county health department has several As long as those types of services are available in the community, the schools don¹t really need to get involved in condom distribution," says Russ Henke, Coordinator of Health Education for MCPS.

The reasoning behind condom distribution programs cannot be faulted. However, the statistics reveal that condom distribution programs fail to accomplish their goals and create more problems than they solve. Instead of trying to justify a failing program, proponents should seek a more effective means of stemming the tide of teenage pregnancies and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.