First, this approach negates the proven effectiveness of safer sex methods. Second, it implies that once in a married relationship, people are immune from sexually transmitted diseases. The language also has harsh implications for children whose parents or caregivers are involved in relationships that do not fall into the category spelled out by the legislation. Finally, the legislation completely excludes nonheterosexually oriented persons by virtue of their inability to legally marry. After accepting the funding, Illinois requested proposals from local entities wanting to apply for a portion of the allocation.
Local entities can include schools, health departments, and community-based agencies.
Those proposals must be submitted by January 1998, and the awards will be announced the following month. Given their need for assistance in funding education, it is not surprising that states have overwhelmingly sought to accept this funding. One study, published by the Alan Guttmacher Institute in New York, looked at California's Postponing Sexual Involvement initiative. The most assertive statement made thus far on the issue comes from the National Institutes of Health. Public opinion is not united behind the use of abstinence-only education and many groups have organized to oppose the legislation.