Study Links Sex On TV To Teen Pregnancy

Girls Who Avidly Watch Racy Programs Have Higher Pregnancy Rates, Research Claims

(CBS/ AP)  Groundbreaking research suggests that pregnancy rates are much higher among teens who watch a lot of TV with sexual dialogue and behavior than among those who have tamer viewing tastes.

"Sex and the City," anyone? That was one of the shows used in the research.

The new study is the first to link those viewing habits with teen pregnancy, said lead author Anita Chandra, a Rand Corp. behavioral scientist. Teens who watched the raciest shows were twice as likely to become pregnant over the next three years as those who watched few such programs.

Previous research by some of the same scientists had already found that watching lots of sex on TV can influence teens to have sex at earlier ages.

Shows that highlight only the positive aspects of sexual behavior without the risks can lead teens to have unprotected sex "before they're ready to make responsible and informed decisions," Chandra said.

The study was released Monday in the November issue of Pediatrics. It involved 2,003 12- to 17-year-old girls and boys nationwide questioned by telephone about their TV viewing habits in 2001. Teens were re-interviewed twice, the last time in 2004, and asked about pregnancy. Among girls, 58 became pregnant during the follow-up, and among boys, 33 said they had gotten a girl pregnant.

Participants were asked how often they watched any of more than 20 TV shows popular among teens at the time or which were found to have lots of sexual content. The programs included "Sex and the City," "That '70s Show" and "Friends."

Pregnancies were twice as common among those who said they watched such shows regularly, compared with teens who said they hardly ever saw them. There were more pregnancies among the oldest teens interviewed, but the rate of pregnancy remained consistent across all age groups among those who watched the racy programs.

Chandra said TV-watching was strongly connected with teen pregnancy even when other factors were considered, including grades, family structure and parents' education level.

But the study didn't adequately address other issues, such as self-esteem, family values and income, contends Elizabeth Schroeder, executive director of Answer, a teen sex education program based at Rutgers University.

"The media does have an impact, but we don't know the full extent of it because there are so many other factors," Schroeder said.

The question of whether a child's viewing habits in general affected pregnancy rates, mainly the total number of hours spent watching television - not just racy programming - was also not covered, as pointed out on CBS' The Early Show.

But Bill Albert, chief program officer at the nonprofit National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, praised the study and said it "catches up with common sense."

"Media helps shape the social script for teenagers. Most parents know that. This is just good research to confirm that," Albert said.

Still, U.S. teen pregnancies were on a 15-year decline until a 3 percent rise in 2006, the latest data available. Experts think that could be just be a statistical blip.

And Albert noted that the downward trend occurred as TV shows were becoming more sexualized, confirming that "it's not the only influence."

Psychologist David Walsh, president of the National Institute on Media and the Family, cited data suggesting only about 19 percent of American teens say they can talk openly with a trusted adult about sex. With many schools not offering sex education, that leaves the media to serve as a sex educator, he said.

"For a kid who no one's talking to about sex, and then he watches sitcoms on TV where sex is presented as this is what the cool people do," the outcome is obvious, Walsh said.

He said the message to parents is to talk to their kids about sex long before children are teens. Parents also should be watching what their kids watch and helping filter messages sex-filled shows are sending, he said.

[chrislova]

I think this is bull. I watch shows that have *** in them and i am not pregnant. Thoese shows dont ever begin to show what real *** is like. It is alot more emotinal and not that glamorouse. It comes with real emotions. If you go out and get pregnant cause of a danm tv show thats on u i think it is not a valid article maybe the numbers say diffrent but.... that is my opinion

[G H M]

Ya the last report it went down.
teach *** education.

[johnsole1]

Intercourse leads to pregnancy. Contraception prevents it. That is your six education lesson for the day. Now, go teach it to your kids.

[earache4]

Bristol shouldn''t have been watching Family Guy.

[duhrer]

What an incredibly stupid article. By their logic, if we show nothing but Disney movies to these same kids who have been exposed to "adult" themed shows, will they all stop having *** with ech other and be wonderful happy frolicking people? What a bunch of baloney.

[prelgovisk]

A few Supreme court justices from Obama will fix it all up. Abortions galore from the coming Obamination''s administration.

[bbrundj]

Nawwww, you''re kidding. Kids don''t watch adult theme shows, at all.

[missingamerica]

I wouldn''t have a problem with rolling sexual mores as depicted on TV back to those of the 1960s...

Call it a national experiment; I do think it would be worthwhile to see if it indeed had a positive impact.

On the other hand, those who think before they get pregnant probably look around at what the Republicans have done to the economy and think "Kids? In this economy? No way!", so maybe we need the accidental pregnancies to keep our births at population replacement levels.

[blackhorn6]

While I''m sure that what children view on tv or see around them may effect how they think *** is and should be treated, I''ve done the research and find that there are two leading factors to the increased sexual activity in children 12 to 19:
1.)*** education no longer exists in schools, leaving abstinence only education to ''teach'' our children. This means that those teens who do not want to follow abstinence (a LARGE majority of teens and pre-teens), do not learn how to engage in safe ***, nor do they learn the full consequences of sexual conduct.
2.)Parents don''t seem to care what their children watch or participate in. Parents don''t want to ''snoop'' in their child''s life, and thus give these hormone driven teens a chance to have *** and to watch potentially inappropriate tv.
I was raised with little restriction on my tv habits, but I was well informed about sexual activity and how to have safe ***. I made the choice to not have *** until later in my teen years, because I knew I wasn''t ready. I can only hope my son will be able to hear real *** education in the classroom.... Instead of people blaming everything but parents and education for the lack of knowledge and caution in teens.

[voidmaster-2009]

The other day it treated my mention of the famous author Philip K. "Richard" with the same overbearing hypocritical puritanism.

Posted by mumu11
***
CBS is like any other business. They are afraid of litigation to the extent that they are not about to risk offending anyone by demonstrating any balls. In an attempt to avoid offending anyone, they offend everyone -- but just a little.

[mumu11]

CBS news forums are protecting the virgin eyes of their public by replacing correct English words and widely used latin locutions that have absolutely no prurient connotations, but which are -obviously- beyond their ken.
The other day it treated my mention of the famous author Philip K. "Richard" with the same overbearing hypocritical puritanism.

[mumu11]

What is needed is a study on the correlation between parents who can''t be bothered, or refuse for "religious reasons, to teach their kids the a,b,c of responsible sexuality and the high rate of teenage pregnancy. I was taught, before I turned 13, that *** without precaution = pregnancy + possible VD and that *** with precaution isn''t over 80% fool proof either. Guess what? I postponed *** until I felt that I could, if need be, raise a kid. TV is in the house for entertainment, not as a nanny-***-teacher for your kids, people!

[voidmaster-2009]

I liked this so much, I think I will post it again.
***
It is not my responsibility to help you raise your kids. If you do not want them to be promiscuous, teach them not to be. Do not expect me or anyone else to watch I Love Lucy reruns just to make your job easier.

Trying to blame teen pregnancy on sexual content in media; or for that matter, obesity on food commercials is simply a form of responsibility-dodging. You see the image of a hamburger and you get hungry. That you lack the self control to avoid running out and getting one speaks of your own irresponsibility in life. Yet our society wants to assign blame to advertisers for using this basic principle.

Look at it this way. A fish is caught by a worm on a hook because it is beyond the fish to realize that it is being trapped. If you have no greater mental capacity than a fish, then accept your station in life and shut up. The rest of us will not.

[caliengineer]

The same effect is what the homosexual agenda is going for when they invade Hollywood and produce positive images of homosexuals and negative images of heterosexual males.
This is why they want to read "King and King" to first graders- "to indoctrinate them at as early an age as possible." (words of a Mass. judge)

[voidmaster-2009]

The people running television know that. It is their plan to corrupt children.

Posted by caliengineer
***
Such a plan, if it really existed, still could not succeed without the cooperation of the parents. See my previous post about the job of child rearing being that of the parents and not of society.

[voidmaster-2009]

This study involved over 2000 girls and boys, ages 12 %u2013 17 and concerned s.e.x. Actually, quite a brilliant tactic to get around all the pedophile paranoia so prevalent these days. I am surprised that no one else seems to have picked up on that angle.

[caliengineer]

You mean ideas introduced through television have an effect on thoughts and action?

The people running television know that. It is their plan to corrupt children.

[hypnotoad72]

I don''''t know about the future, but it''''s definately the present of Conservative Republican Sarah Palin''''s daughter!

Posted by patriotic9 at 09:55 PM : Nov 03, 2008
----

"Definitely".

And I''m well aware of her situation. It is unfortunate. And, if you''ve read previous posts, I''ve hammered time and again and in many other related posts that there are issues outside of parental guidance afoot. That need of "acceptance"; media - especially when combined with ''peer pressure'' - makes a formidable foe.

[patriotic9]

"out of wedlock"? The last time I used that phrase, all sorts of crackpot liberal militant nitwits made crass jokes.

Whatever; that''s their future.


Posted by Hypnotoad72 at 09:46 PM : Nov 03, 2008

I don''t know about the future, but it''s definately the present of Conservative Republican Sarah Palin''s daughter!

[hypnotoad72]

"out of wedlock"? The last time I used that phrase, all sorts of crackpot liberal militant nitwits made crass jokes.

Whatever; that''s their future.