A new study by researchers at my alma mater, University of Southern California, found that young people with smart phones were 1.5 times more likely to be sexually active than those without. Results were presented at this week’s American Public Health Association annual conference. I’ve written before about the relationship between media and imagery and its particular impact on healthy human development, so I found this study particularly interesting.
The lynchpin is the internet access, obviously, since that’s where smart phones differ from regular cell phones. The key findings pulled from the study are:
- young people with smartphones are two times as likely to have been approached online for sex — and more than twice as likely to be sexually active with an Internet-met partner;
- 5 percent of high school students used the internet to seek sex; and
- non-heterosexual high school students were five times more likely to seek sex online — and more than four times as likely to have unprotected sex during their last intercourse with an online-met sex partner.
The odds of having unprotected sex with a casual and perhaps anonymous partner are of course the most troubling to public health professionals. It’s not surprising that non-heterosexual students were five times more likely to seek sex online than heterosexual teens, since those findings have been seen before and highlight the difficulty that many non-heterosexual students may have come out, the lack of social support they may feel, and the isolation that coming out may have brought on.
The researchers used a sample of 1,839 Los Angeles high school students between the ages of 12-18, and they controlled for age, race, gender, and sexual orientation. Since this is the first study to really explore this, I’d be really interested in follow-up studies looking at other markers of sexual behavior in teens in relation to these findings. I’m also fascinated by the fact that 5% of high school students used the internet to seek sex, and am really interested in seeing how that number changes as smart phones become ubiquitous even in high school.
In case you wanted to read something today that will make make you fume, check out ThinkProgress’ report about an abstinence-only education program in Fresno (for shame, California). It is massively, massively irresponsible.
Did you know that getting a lot of rest can prevent you from getting STDs? And that HIV can be spread by kissing? Let that marinate for a bit, because that’s what kids in Clovis, CA, are going to come out of school thinking.
Condoms? Not addressed. Contraception? Not covered.
This curriculum is actually against California law, which requires medically accurate sexual health education to be delivered to students. The ACLU is suing.
The Center for Disease Control’s Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) will lose $10 million in funding if the Fiscal Year 2012 Omnibus Appropriations bill, which sailed through the House of Reps, comes to be. And to kick the prevention specialists at DASH while they’re down, the funding for absitence-only “sex education” will make an unwelcome return.
The DASH has proven time and again that the CDC, as well as state health agencies, are capable of creating health education initiatives that teach students and adolescents the best ways to stay healthy and prevent both chronic and infectious diseases. They have worked with school districts as well as other governmental organizations to not only create effective STI-prevention and teen pregnancy prevention initiatives, but also do an incredible job of monitoring the risky behaviors that teens are currently engaging in across the United States – including substance use and abuse, sexual behavior, drunk driving, physical violence, and depression and suicide, as well as tracking the rates of victimization that teens experience in the form of sexual assault and dating violence. Understanding how common these behaviors are, knowing in what areas and regions they seem to erupt more intensely, and determining what demographics on a national level are at greatest risk for some of these behaviors is essential for targeted education and prevention initiatives.
Without these prevention strategies, and without the ability to track the rates of risky behaviors to know how to develop such strategies, we will be left to treat the consequences (STI care, HIV treatement and care, babies born to teen moms), which are of course ultimately far more expensive. The CDC has (or had) the resources as well as the expertise with its impressive body of scientists and researchers, to do so. And lest we forget, abstinence only education? Doesn’t do teens any favors, and in fact leaves them woefully misinformed in how they should protect themselves when they do ultimately engage in sexual activity.
RH Reality Check details this upsetting news here. On the heels of Sebelius’ decision, this has been a pretty devastating month for adolescents.