Covering It All: Don’t Neglect Condoms for Prevention

Throughout October 2009, young people and their allies are engaging in advocacy efforts in communities across the country to raise awareness for the need for REAL sex education.
The Sex Ed Month of Action will engage young people and their allies
across the United States in showing their support for comprehensive sex

A survey out of the British Office of National Statistics
last week indicated that, for the first time since tracking began, as many
women in the U.K. were using condoms as a birth control method as were using
the birth control pill.   As I searched through the research and
news articles to try and figure out what was making condoms more popular in the
U.K., I found myself being a little jealous.

I realize that it may be unfair to compare two countries’
birth control usage statistics. 
There are myriad societal and cultural factors (different health
care delivery systems to use but one example), that affect individual
choices of contraception.  Still, in the United
States about 30 percent of the women who use contraception choose the pill and
only about 18 percent choose condoms with their partner. So not only did I start to wonder what is
making the condom more popular there but also what is inhibiting its popularity

Part of the problem is obvious. The condom has always been a
favorite target of the right wing.  Its members constantly deride the effectiveness
of this method and point to lessons about the proper way to use condoms as proof
that comprehensive sexuality education programs go too far.  My best guess
as to why they hate condoms so much is that besides abstinence, this is the
only method of birth control that also offers protection against HIV/AIDS and
other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).  It allows people to have sex while greatly, greatly
reducing the risk of negative consequences and, because the Right has a
worldview that is based around consequences, it must be very upsetting.

Those who have followed the evolution of messaging around
sexuality education over the last twenty years know that the Right has labeled
anything other than abstinence education as “condom programs.”  In response, so as not to be pigeonholed as “the condom
people,” I think that we have moved too far away from our staunch promotion of
the male condom (not to mention the female condom, which is not as widely accessible but as
effective as male condoms in preventing both STDs, including HIV/AIDS, and pregnancy).  We
are, and should be, unabashedly pro-condom.

Unfortunately, in many situations, we discuss these as if they
are just another option in the contraceptive arsenal.  Frankly, this isn’t
good enough.   Condoms deserve to be talked about in a totally
different breath from other contraceptive methods because they are simply the
best weapon we have against so many of the sexual health challenges we face
here in the United States and across the globe.

Condoms are affordable, easy to use with the proper
instruction, and extraordinarily effective in preventing both STDs, including
HIV, and pregnancy if used consistently and correctly.   It is terrifying
to think where the HIV epidemic would be in the United States (not to mention
the global pandemic) were it not for the condom.  I am convinced that our best hope in this battle is to get
the millions upon millions of necessary condoms into the hands of people who
desperately need them to protect themselves.  This is especially true in
countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, such as Zambia, where AIDS has driven life
expectancy down into the mid-30s.

I am not naïve enough to think that condoms are the answer
to all our problems, but they certainly give us the most “bang for the buck,” if
you can pardon the expression, when it comes to prevention.

Because change starts at home, we must continue to emphasize
the efficiency and effectiveness of condoms in our sex education programs.
We have an opportunity to do so right now as Congress is on track to
eliminate funding for all existing abstinence-only-until-marriage programs –
programs that have historically deliberately undermined young people’s faith in
condoms.  Both the House and the
Senate are working on funding for more comprehensive programs.  I’m concerned, however, because there
is the possibility that this funding focuses exclusively on teen pregnancy
prevention.  While this is a noble
and important goal it is not enough and I fear it will not place sufficient
emphasis on the unique importance of condoms (after all, there are other ways
for sexually active teens to prevent pregnancy but these would leave them
vulnerable to STDs).

Let’s not miss this opportunity to remind ourselves, the
world, and yes, the Right, that we are and ought to be pro-condom. Congress needs
to enact a broad initiative that addresses unintended teen pregnancy, as well
as STD and HIV prevention. This will
provide our young people with a more holistic, comprehensive approach to their
sexual health, and it will give us the opportunity to further promote that
sometimes misunderstood hero in the war for sexual health – the

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

  • harry834

    Many cheers for our latex (or non-latex) friend!

  • harry834

    to also discuss under what circumstances one may not use a condom. I’d guess when you know both of you are tested negative and your monogamous.

    Rhythm method?

  • grayduck

    "Condoms are affordable, easy to use with the proper instruction, and extraordinarily effective in preventing both STDs, including HIV, and pregnancy if used consistently and correctly."


    Why did the author not provide any scientific research to support these assertions? Perhaps because such evidence is nonexistent? Perhaps because the empirical evidence is emphatic in showing the opposite?


    The objective evidence shows that condoms are inferior to other methods. For example, a study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute found that a woman relying on a long-acting form of contraception was much less likely to obtain an abortion than a sexually active woman relying on condoms. The study compared contraceptive use among women obtaining abortions to contraceptive use among all women at risk of unintended pregnancy. The study found that while 40.5 percent of all women at risk of unintended pregnancy used long-acting forms of contraception, only 1.1 percent of women obtaining abortions had relied upon long-acting forms of contraception in the month they became pregnant. On the other hand, the study found that a sexually active woman who relies on male condoms as her method of contraception actually had an elevated chance of obtaining an abortion compared with the population of women at risk of unintended pregnancy as a whole. Specifically, the 18.9 percent of sexually active women relying upon condoms generated 27.6 percent of the abortions.




    The latest data show that condoms have a one-year, typical-use failure rate of 17.4 percent. A typical woman, according to the Guttmacher Institute, is sexually active but trying to avoid pregnancy for thirty years of her life. Extrapolating the 17.4 percent failure rate across thirty years yields a failure rate of 99.7 percent! (1-(1-0.174)^30) I am not aware of any study that shows that a significant number of people would be happy with a 99.7 percent failure rate.



    Most of the failures result from user error, which means that condoms are not easy to use at all.


    The author’s failure to use science to support his position rendered his arguments unpersuasive.


  • grayduck

    The silence coming from this clown is instructive.