Didn't you know:

(V): If you want the last word just say so, but whether that word will be meaningful or just you playing a ribbing game....

Artful Dodger: If you want the last word just say so, but whether that word will be meaningful or just you playing a ribbing game....

(V): Oh yes you do. Otherwise why always the last word?

Nope..... I especially loved losing when it helped tune my fruit machine sense.

Cos afters I never played a machine that I lost on

(V): YOu hate losing don't you?

cherry picked from a nationwide collection by the UK government's office of national statistics....

Tell me how they are cherry picked Dan?

"Just ask Rod or Vikes"

Who are on the other side of the political fence as stated before.

Now I've made my point clearly......

... yet when asked about how Christian churches are using politicians to promote and enforce their views on Gay marriage and rights.

.. you won't reply.

(V): Sore loser?

Only you could think your cherry picked stats were better than my peer reviewed studies.

You're the one that always likes to have the last word. Just ask Rod or Vikes. You always pettifog an issue instead of addressing it in a way that can bring about healthy dialogue. You always have! No surprise here.

Please, go post another cherry picked stat for me to dismantle!

Artful Dodger: Nope.. your just a sore loser when it comes to your idols.

All the studies you cited were not only rigged, but they only addressed declining years and not the over all picture. Plus your studies were limited in scope and funded by advocates for increase availability of contraceptives to under age teens. Yeah, they're not biased.

Yer pettifogging again

Based on the newest teenage pregnancy statistics 2010, teen pregnancy is once again on the rise after decreasing substantially since the early 1990s. According to these new teenage pregnancy statistics for 2010, teen girls ages 15 to 19 are the most likely to get pregnant as a teen.

The overall teenage pregnancy statistics also include the total number of pregnancies that are carried to full term and delivered as well as the total number of abortions and miscarriages. However, the increase has only risen three percent since 2006, so researchers are unsure if the teenage pregnancy statistics will continue to rise. There are about 40 teenage girls getting pregnant each year out of ever 1,000, according to the teenage pregnancy statistics for 2010.

.[E]xperts have suspected for several years, based on trends in teens’ contraceptive use…that the overall teen pregnancy rate would increase in the mid-2000s….The significant drop in teen pregnancy rates in the 1990s was overwhelmingly the result of more and better use of contraceptives among sexually active teens. However, this decline started to stall out in the early 2000s

Artful Dodger: The data they stated was rigged Dan.

Do you understand rigged? As in biased from the start, will confirm my belief even though it's wrong but I want to be right so I'll use studies and not present them clearly!!

You've been conned by your own side... get over it!!

SPAIN, January 5, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Abortion advocates often promote contraception by claiming that as contraception use increases, the number of “unwanted” pregnancies and therefore abortions will decrease. But a new study out of Spain has found the exact opposite, suggesting that contraception actually increases abortion rates.

stop pettifogging

From Dan's so called unbiased studies.

"........We recruited young people at these sites by asking workers to identify young people aged 13-15 who were at risk of teenage pregnancy, substance misuse, or exclusion from school (that is, as for the YPDP), although in practice field workers sometimes asked workers to identify “vulnerable” young people. We thus aimed to recruit young people in comparison sites who might have been referred to the YPDP had it been delivered in their area......."

(V): You are so wrong...again.

4. Studies show that greater access to contraception does not reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions. Increasing access to contraception gives teens a false sense of security, leading to earlier onset of sexual activity and more sexual partners, which counteracts any reduction in unintended pregnancies.
Researchers in Spain examined patterns of contraceptive use and abortions in Spain over a ten-year period from 1997-2007. Their findings, published in the journal Contraception in January
2
2011, were that a 63 percent increase in the use of contraceptives was accompanied by a 108 percent increase in the rate of elective abortions.10
In July 2009 results were published from an expensive three-year program at 54 sites, funded by England’s Department of Health, seeking to “reduce teenage pregnancy” through, among other things, sex education and advice on access to family planning beginning at ages 13-15. “No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies.” Young women who took part in the program were more likely than those in the control group to report that they had been pregnant (16% vs. 6%) and had early heterosexual experience (58% vs. 33%).
11
David Paton, author of four major studies in this area, has found “no evidence” that “the provision of family planning reduces either underage conception or abortion rates.”
12 He sums up the U.K. experience: “It is clear that providing more family planning clinics, far from having the effect of reducing conception rates, has actually led to an increase…. The availability of the morning-after pill seems to be encouraging risky behavior. It appears that if people have access to family planning advice they think they automatically have a lower risk of pregnancy.” 13
K. Edgardh found that despite free contraceptive counseling, low cost condoms and oral contraceptives, and over-the-counter emergency contraception (EC), Swedish teen abortion rates rose from 17 per thousand to 22.5 per thousand between 1995 and 2001.

Health outcomes of youth development programme in England: prospective matched comparison study
BMJ 2009; 339 doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2534 (Published 7 July 2009)
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b2534


Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of youth development in reducing teenage pregnancy, substance use, and other outcomes.

Design Prospective matched comparison study.

Setting 54 youth service sites in England.

Participants Young people (n=2724) aged 13-15 years at baseline deemed by professionals as at risk of teenage pregnancy, substance misuse, or school exclusion or to be vulnerable.

Intervention Intensive, multicomponent youth development programme including sex and drugs education (Young People’s Development Programme) versus standard youth provision.

Main outcome measures Various, including pregnancy, weekly cannabis use, and monthly drunkenness at 18 months.

Results Young women in the intervention group more commonly reported pregnancy than did those in the comparison group (16% v 6%; adjusted odds ratio 3.55, 95% confidence interval 1.32 to 9.50). Young women in the intervention group also more commonly reported early heterosexual experience (58% v 33%; adjusted odds ratio 2.53, 1.09 to 5.92) and expectation of teenage parenthood (34% v 24%; 1.61, 1.07 to 2.43).

Conclusions No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies, drunkenness, or cannabis use. Some results suggested an adverse effect. Although methodological limitations may at least partly explain these findings, any further implementation of such interventions in the UK should be only within randomised trials.

Artful Dodger:


....... Dan...

http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/u/under-18%20and%20under-16%20conceptions%202010%20-%20key%20findings.pdf

Look over the figures as a whole yourself, I did post the link for the stats and their source.

Here's your source..

http://old.usccb.org/prolife/issues/contraception/contraception-fact-sheet-3-17-11.pdf

and that data..

M. Wiggins et al., “Health Outcomes of Youth Development Programme in England: Prospective Matched Comparison Study,” British Medical Journal 339.72 (2009): b2534; advance online publication (7 July 2009): 1-8 at l; www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/339/jul07_2/b2534

.......>>>>>>> As stated in the pdf from the Catholic confederation by the secretariat of pro life activities.

A HARDLY UNBIASED GROUP

Atheism? If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning... - C.S. Lewis

(V): Yes I can. I see you're cherry picked ones.

the collection of a whole countries statistics v a study in 54 sites
... which sites, where Dan?

you can't see the difference between some cherry picked data and that of a country as a whole.

Like Murdoch this week. Can't remember anything about phone hacking.. but he can remember everything about how the UK politicians tried to be where the sun doesn't shine regarding his self.

(V): You explain why there's a difference in what you posted and what I posted. I've read these sort of studies many times before and the results are always the same.

Artful Dodger: Studies... studies.. studies.

Ok. Then explain why the official figures, ie those one collected on how many teen pregnancies for the whole of the UK, as well as by country within the UK (ie England, Scotland, Wales and NI) show a drop?

Do your guys allow for the way diet has changed the age at which UK girls change to young women? The way the end of rationing would have caused a dramatic increase in girls of a younger age getting their hormones change?

"Then why do you do that all the time? That's exactly what you are known for!!!"

By those on the other side of the political spectrum. Hardly a bias free zone.

(V): Then why do you do that all the time? That's exactly what you are known for!!!

(V): You are so wrong...again.

4. Studies show that greater access to contraception does not reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions. Increasing access to contraception gives teens a false sense of security, leading to earlier onset of sexual activity and more sexual partners, which counteracts any reduction in unintended pregnancies.
Researchers in Spain examined patterns of contraceptive use and abortions in Spain over a ten-year period from 1997-2007. Their findings, published in the journal Contraception in January
2
2011, were that a 63 percent increase in the use of contraceptives was accompanied by a 108 percent increase in the rate of elective abortions.10
In July 2009 results were published from an expensive three-year program at 54 sites, funded by England’s Department of Health, seeking to “reduce teenage pregnancy” through, among other things, sex education and advice on access to family planning beginning at ages 13-15. “No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies.” Young women who took part in the program were more likely than those in the control group to report that they had been pregnant (16% vs. 6%) and had early heterosexual experience (58% vs. 33%).
11
David Paton, author of four major studies in this area, has found “no evidence” that “the provision of family planning reduces either underage conception or abortion rates.”
12 He sums up the U.K. experience: “It is clear that providing more family planning clinics, far from having the effect of reducing conception rates, has actually led to an increase…. The availability of the morning-after pill seems to be encouraging risky behavior. It appears that if people have access to family planning advice they think they automatically have a lower risk of pregnancy.” 13
K. Edgardh found that despite free contraceptive counseling, low cost condoms and oral contraceptives, and over-the-counter emergency contraception (EC), Swedish teen abortion rates rose from 17 per thousand to 22.5 per thousand between 1995 and 2001.
14

Table 2: Under 16 Conceptions for England: 1998-2010

1998 7,855
1999 7,408
2000 7,620
2001 7,407
2002 7,395
2003 7,558
2004 7,181
2005 7,473
2006 7,330
2007 7,718
2008 7,123
2009 6,756
2010 6,256
Sources: Office for National Statistics, 2012
*per thousand females aged 13-15

Education Secretary Michael Gove is to examine claims the Catholic Education Service (CES) broke impartiality rules on the topic of gay marriage.

It emerged this week that the CES wrote to nearly 400 state-funded Roman Catholic schools inviting them to back a petition against gay civil marriage.

Schools and teachers are forbidden to promote one-sided political arguments. The CES has denied breaking any laws, saying Catholic views on marriage are religious, not political.

On Thursday, the Welsh government said it was to investigate similar complaints against the CES.

"Schools have a responsibility under law to ensure children are insulated from political activity and campaigning in the classroom," said a Department for Education spokesperson.

"While faith schools, rightly, have the freedom to teach about sexual relations and marriage in the context of their own religion, that should not extend to political campaigning.

"Officials are looking into this as ministers are anxious to establish the full facts of this case and will be meeting representatives of the CES shortly."

Earlier this week, Pinknews.co.uk reported that students at St Philomena's Catholic High School for Girls in Carshalton were "encouraged" to sign the anti-equality pledge by the school's headmistress.

"In our assembly for the whole sixth form you could feel people bristling as she explained parts of the letter and encouraged us to sign the petition," a pupil was quoted as saying.

"She said things about gay marriage and civil partnerships being unnatural. It was just a really outdated, misjudged and heavily biased presentation."

.. I've also studied when someone is pettifogging or trying to just argue for the sake of it.

Dan.. here for you.. spin free, is some stats that everyone in the UK already knows. Why, because we live here.

Under-18 conceptions
England and Wales
 Figures for England and Wales show that the 2010 under-18 conception rate
(35.5 conceptions per 1,000) is the lowest estimated rate since 1969. The
7.3% decline in the under-18 conception rate 2009 to 2010 represents the
greatest single year decrease in the under-18 conception rate since 1975/76.
 Data for England and Wales show that conception numbers and rates fell at
all ages under-18 (see Table 3 in Annex 1). Younger age groups (especially
those under 15) continue to account for a very small proportion of teenage
conceptions. In 2010 5% of under-18 conceptions in England and Wales
were to under 15s.
England
 In 2010, the under-18 conception rate for England was 35.4 conceptions per
1,000 girls aged 15-17. This represents a decline of 7.3% since 2009 (38.2
conceptions per 1,000) and continues the overall downward trend observed
since 1998. The under-18 conception rate has fallen by 24% since 1998,
down from 46.6 conceptions per 1,000 (see Table 1 in Annex 1).
 The total number of under-18 conceptions in England has declined by 10.5%
since 2009, down from 35,966 to 32,552.
 The proportion of conceptions leading to abortions for under-18s was 50.3%,
up slightly from 2009 (49.1%).
 Both maternity and abortion rates for under-18s are declining. However, the
rate of under-18 conceptions leading to births continues to fall at a faster rate
than overall conceptions. In 2010, the rate of under-18 conceptions leading to
births was 17.6 per 1,000. This is 10% lower than in 2009 (19.5 per 1,000)
and 35% lower than in 1998 (26.9 per 1,000) (see Figure 1 in Annex 1)

http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/u/under-18%20and%20under-16%20conceptions%202010%20-%20key%20findings.pdf

Now... If you can find more reliable stats within your spin doctors catalogue of manipulation... Go ahead... Please try

.. I have more if you want.. but the data will so close your argument you couldna take it

.. your head might explode!!

(V):  Again, that was comparing a one time year to a previous year.  NOT A STEADY DECLINE.

The SHORT TERM LOSS  you cite was from 2008 to 2009.  It just so happens that the loss was lower than the high of 1980.   But what is needed to prove your thesis is a long term STEADY DECLINE. 

You didn't show that now did you?    And here I though you studied stats!

Artful Dodger: No.... You didn't read THIS part...

"In fact the teen pregnancy rate for 2009 (of 38,259 girls aged 18 or younger in England and Wales) was estimated to be the lowest since the early 1980s"

>>>>>>>>>>>

"And just in case you need an extra clue, from 2008 to 2009 is a "short run pregnancy rate....""

Yes, but [[I'll repeat so you don't miss it this time]] .... from the early 80's isn't.

Just accept, your guy.. messed up. Maybe one of those actually doing the work for him (as it seems is the way with him) screwed up and he lazily didn't check.

... which seems to a common factor in conservative circles.

(V): You cite only short term losses.  I clearly said that over the long run:

Peter Arcidiacono found that among teens, “increasing access to
contraception may actually increase long run pregnancy rates even though
short run pregnancy rates fall. On the other hand, policies that
decrease access to contraception, and hence sexual activity, may lower
pregnancy rates in the long run.”

You must have forgotten to read that part.  And just in case you need an extra clue, from 2008 to 2009 is a "short run pregnancy rate...."

Übergeek 바둑이:

>

"Here is a
good question: Has the teaching of Christianity reduced the number of
unintended pregnancies, transmission of STDs, or abortions?"

That's not the question being discussed.  The question is about the role of contraception availability in reducing pregnancies and abortions.  It's clear that availability doesn't curb unwanted pregnancies.  Just deal with that fact on the face of it.  In fact, explain why it's ok to make contraceptives available when in fact pregnancies and abortions have gone UP over the long haul. 

The
reason is that there is a lack of education in schools. Sex is seen as
a "bad" thing to teach children. The general thinking is that if
children learn about sex, they will become sexually active themselves.

No.  Lack of education isn't the problem.  And it's not seen as "bad."  It seen as the respoonsibility of the parents.  What's wrong with that?

"In
reality, becoming sexually active has nothing to do with sexual
education, religious education, or contraceptive use. It has to do with
human physiology."

Not entirely true.  But we'll move on.

If religious education and "abstinence"
worked,.....

Am I making the argument that it does????  If so, where?  (here's a clue, I'm not---you're inferring it)
I never said Christianity worked automatically.   If someone has told you that, tell them AD says they are full of crap. ;)


I don't know the answer to this problem.  I think we have a breakdown in society and a multitude of factors are at play when it comes to sexual activity.  As there is nothing new under the sun, promiscuity has been around since the beginning.   Can it be fixed?  NO.  Can the problem be lessened?  Yes but likely no one would agree on a solution.  Kids having kids isn't helping the situation.  And I know that many parents are simply incompetent.  Drugs and selfish ideas, poverty and desperation...on and on.  So many things contribute to the problem there is NO solution.  Best that can be hoped for is to bring the numbers down.  How that can be done will NEVER be agreed upon.  Oh well. 

Übergeek 바둑이:<b>Übergeek 바둑이</b>: Artful Dodger:

> Obeying the government is a Christian principle.

Where in the Bible does it say that? "To Caesar what is of caesar. To God what is of God."

Romans 13:1 says, "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God."
Acts 5:29 says, <span>"We must obey God rather than men." Whenever a government violates biblical teaching----

> Being a good citizen is a Christian principle.
How so? What does a "good citizen" mean?

Rom. 13:6-7, <span>"For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. ⁷ Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor."

> It doesn't make one a Christian just becuase they follow the principles. But there is no escaping the influence of the Judeo/Christian ethic.

But here is the thing, the "Christian ethic" existed before Jesus was born.

I never made the claim otherwise.  But there is no doubt that the Judeo/Christian ethic is foundational to laws in the US (just read all the early writings...."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."  I'm not going to split hairs over the chicken or egg.

>> "Everybody is required to pay for Defense Insurance"

> I won't even bother with a statement like this. It's false on the face of it. Please don't post this again. It hurts when I fall on the floor and laugh my @$$ off.

You are missing the point. It is an analogy. If people who did not pay "Defense Insurance" were not protected, they would be forced to go to war to defend themselves; just as those without healthcare are forced to fend for themselves when they have no money.

Nonsense.   (meaning you make no sense here).   The government is required by LAW to protect its citizens and they are allowed by LAW to collect taxes.   It's NOT insurance.  That's just so far wrong there's no point in discussing it further.  Your analogy fails here.  Better for you to show why the individual mandate in the ObamaCare bill is Constitutional.  Paying for defense IS. 

*****
In fact the teen pregnancy rate for 2009 (of 38,259 girls aged 18 or younger in England and Wales) was estimated to be the lowest since the early 1980s.*****

what hasn't been said is that ABORTION RATES HAVE RISEN.......

let me set things right.....the australian Govt. DOES NOT allow teenage girls access to contraception pills without a prescription obtainable from a Doctor....the UK govt does.

What gets me is this crazy Christian notion that denies the bilogical mechanics of humans. N' to turn the baby making system into a moral thing.

It also ignores some common known data about how our diets have change the date girls become young ladies.... weight matters!!

Well. I'll go by the figures Dan. Teenage pegnancy has decreased.

"The Labour party did have targets and to meet these a dedicated teenage pregnancy co-ordinator (TPC) was allocated to health regions. The figures for 2009 show teen pregnancy reducing in England and Wales as the dedicated support for teens throughout the country seemed to be taking effect.

In fact the teen pregnancy rate for 2009 (of 38,259 girls aged 18 or younger in England and Wales) was estimated to be the lowest since the early 1980s.

Unfortunately the effects of the change of government on teen pregnancy can't be seen as the Office for National Statistics (ONS) teen pregnancy rates are two years out of date. We do know that the number of TPCs is reducing as the rearrangements in the health service take place, as Rachel Williams discovers :

TPCs have been cut in just over a third of areas – including several where conception rates among under-18s are very high.

Further research from Rachel Williams shows that of the 150 councils surveyed for the piece, 71 still have a TPC or equivalent (3 councils had no TPC before). Of the 76 councils loosing their TPC, 61 councils will see the loss this year and in 15 councils the loss has already happened.

We can only wait to see what the ONS report in the future about teenage pregnancy rates.

Other interesting facts include:

• The number of conceptions to women aged under 18 was 38,259 in 2009 compared with 41,361 in 2008, a decline of 7.5%
• Nearly half (48.8%) of conceptions to women aged under 18 in 2009 led to a legal abortion
• The number of conceptions to girls aged under 16 was 7,158 in 2009, compared with 7,586 in 2008 (a decrease of 5.6%)
• Three-fifths (59.8%) of conceptions to girls aged under 16 in 2009 led to a legal abortion.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From a reliable source!!


But keep going, ya might find the truth for once. Then old lies made by men who the pill made feel less of a man will fade from your clouded eyes.

Artful Dodger:

> Need a condom? Not a problem. Here, take two!

Here is a good question: Has the teaching of Christianity reduced the number of unintended pregnancies, transmission of STDs, or abortions?

The answer is that it has not. Neither have contraceptive devices.

The reason is that there is a lack of education in schools. Sex is seen as a "bad" thing to teach children. The general thinking is that if children learn about sex, they will become sexually active themselves.

In reality, becoming sexually active has nothing to do with sexual education, religious education, or contraceptive use. It has to do with human physiology.

If religious education and "abstinence" worked, Christianity would have suceeded in stamping out sex out of wedlock centuries ago. For 2000 years Chistianity has been preaching abstinence and sex only in the context of reproduction and marriage.

After 2000 years of thrying the results are: Good? So so? Bad?

If teaching Chirstianity worked automatically, there would be no Bristol Palins in this world.

If abstinence and religious education have failed for 2000 years, what should people do then? Keep repeating the same failed educational pattern for another 2000 years?

Artful Dodger:

> Obeying the government is a Christian principle.

Where in the Bible does it say that? "To Caesar what is of caesar. To God what is of God." It is about as close as I see Jesus make a statement between the big divide of the Roman State and the reformed Judaism Jesus was preaching. Barrack obama is asking you to accept healthcare reform. Are you obeying his wishes as the head of your government?

> Being a good citizen is a Christian principle.

How so? What does a "good citizen" mean? Good citizens go to war when called to do so and they will kill on behalf of the state when called to do so. They will also apply the death penalty when called to do so by a court of law. Good citizens have the right to own lethal weapons because the constitution protects that right. Good citizens can also get rich at other good citizen's expense even though "It is easier for a camel to go through a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

> It doesn't make one a Christian just becuase they follow the principles. But there is no escaping the influence of the Judeo/Christian ethic.

But here is the thing, the "Christian ethic" existed before Jesus was born. The Christian ethic is the stoicist ethic of the Greeks as assimilated by the early church. Buddha was preaching what is essentially the same ethic a good 500 years before Christ. Christianity does not hold a monopoly on good and evil. If anything, Christianity is a "late comer" when compared to Greek and indian philosophers.

>> "Everybody is required to pay for Defense Insurance"

> I won't even bother with a statement like this. It's false on the face of it. Please don't post this again. It hurts when I fall on the floor and laugh my @$$ off.

You are missing the point. It is an analogy. If people who did not pay "Defense Insurance" were not protected, they would be forced to go to war to defend themselves; just as those without healthcare are forced to fend for themselves when they have no money.

Ya been schooled again Jules!

Peter Arcidiacono found that among teens, “increasing access to contraception may actually increase long run pregnancy rates even though short run pregnancy rates fall. On the other hand, policies that decrease access to contraception, and hence sexual activity, may lower pregnancy rates in the long run.”
15
5. Emergency Contraception (EC) does not reduce unintended pregnancy and abortion.
Twenty-three studies published between 1998 and 2006, and analyzed by James Trussell’s team at Princeton University, measured the effect of increased EC access on EC use, unintended pregnancy, and abortion. Not a single study among the 23 found a reduction in unintended pregnancies or abortions following increased access to emergency contraception.16www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/factsheetec21607.shtml For more information, including the conclusions of individual studies and researchers on this point, see “Fact Sheet: Emergency Contraception Fails to Reduce Unintended Pregnancy and Abortion,” at .

http://old.usccb.org/prolife/issues/contraception/contraception-fact-sheet-3-17-11.pdf



all studies, properly conducted, conclude basically the same thing. More access to contraception leads to more pregnancies in the long run.

(V):
You are so wrong...again.

4. Studies show that greater access to contraception does not reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions. Increasing access to contraception gives teens a false sense of security, leading to earlier onset of sexual activity and more sexual partners, which counteracts any reduction in unintended pregnancies.
Researchers in Spain examined patterns of contraceptive use and abortions in Spain over a ten-year period from 1997-2007. Their findings, published in the journal Contraception in January
2
2011, were that a 63 percent increase in the use of contraceptives was accompanied by a 108 percent increase in the rate of elective abortions.10
In July 2009 results were published from an expensive three-year program at 54 sites, funded by England’s Department of Health, seeking to “reduce teenage pregnancy” through, among other things, sex education and advice on access to family planning beginning at ages 13-15. “No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies.” Young women who took part in the program were more likely than those in the control group to report that they had been pregnant (16% vs. 6%) and had early heterosexual experience (58% vs. 33%).
11
David Paton, author of four major studies in this area, has found “no evidence” that “the provision of family planning reduces either underage conception or abortion rates.”
12 He sums up the U.K. experience: “It is clear that providing more family planning clinics, far from having the effect of reducing conception rates, has actually led to an increase…. The availability of the morning-after pill seems to be encouraging risky behavior. It appears that if people have access to family planning advice they think they automatically have a lower risk of pregnancy.” 13
K. Edgardh found that despite free contraceptive counseling, low cost condoms and oral contraceptives, and over-the-counter emergency contraception (EC), Swedish teen abortion rates rose from 17 per thousand to 22.5 per thousand between 1995 and 2001.
14

(V):