CBS: Actress Kate Walsh Says Teen Abstinence ‘Like Asking Them Not to Grow’

Photo of Kyle Drennen.
By Kyle Drennen | March 28, 2008 - 15:17 ET

NewsBusters.org - Media Research CenterOn Friday’s CBS "Early Show," co-host Julie Chen teased her upcoming interview with "Gray’s Anatomy" actress Kate Walsh on sex education: "She is one of the hottest actresses in Hollywood today due to her roles on "Gray's Anatomy" and "Private Practice," but she's also passionate about sex education for American teens, and she took her campaign to Capitol Hill. We're going to ask her why this issue is so important." The segment that followed was another example of the media’s denigration of abstinence education. Walsh, who is a board member for Planned Parenthood, said during the interview: "Abstinence is one -- abstinence is one aspect of sex education, but it is not the complete aspect. And to expect, I think, everybody to remain abstinent is just -- it's like asking them not to grow. It's like we don't ask people to not try out for sports." Chen’s response: "Yeah, I hear you."

Chen began the interview by asking: "Tell us in your opinion what's wrong with the way we're teaching our kids in this country about sex education and what needs to be changed." Of course, there was no advocate for abstinence-only education asked to give their opinion in the segment.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Walsh replied by declaring that:

Well, abstinence-only is not working. It's a $1.5 billion program over the last ten years that has, quite frankly, failed. The CDC reported that one in five teenage girls between the ages of 14 and 19 are infected with STIs, and that, to me, is appalling and shameful. And in the age of information, these women are just not getting adequate information.

Walsh followed up by explaining that: "...in addition to abstinence, which is fine, there just needs to be a comprehensive sex education program, and we can't be relying on, you know, private foundations, or parents, or, you know, teens' peers, to be educating each other. We really do need government help on this."

Walsh went on to make the comparison between sex education and academic subjects: "...it's a shame to me that we spend money educating our kids on, you know, history, math, science, and English literature, and we -- we can't educate them sexually."

This is not the first time CBS has touted "comprehensive sex education." In January, Katie Couric promoted the "Midwest Teen Sex Show" on the CBS "Evening News."

Here is the full transcript of the segment:

7:01AM TEASER:

JULIE CHEN: Plus, Kate Walsh. She is one of the hottest actresses in Hollywood today due to her roles on "Grey's Anatomy" and "Private Practice," but she's also passionate about sex education for American teens, and she took her campaign to Capitol Hill. We're going to ask her why this issue is so important.

7:24AM TEASER:

CHEN: In our next hour, actress Kate Walsh will tell us why she paid a special visit to Capitol Hill.

7:30AM TEASER:

CHEN: Also ahead this half hour, Kate Walsh. She has become a big, huge star on the hit TV series "Grey's Anatomy" and "Private Practice." Now she's taking her fame to Capitol Hill to focus on an issue she is passionate about, sex education. This morning, we'll talk to her live.

7:17AM SEGMENT:

JULIE CHEN: This morning's "Health Watch," sex education for teens. Actress Kate Walsh played a doctor on the hit series "Grey's Anatomy," and now on "Private Practice." In real life, she's a board member for Planned Parenthood. Yesterday she was on Capitol Hill to talk about the need for more funding for sex education. This morning she joins us from Washington. Kate, good morning.

KATE WALSH: Good morning.

CHEN: Tell us in your opinion what's wrong with the way we're teaching our kids in this country about sex education and what needs to be changed.

WALSH: Well, abstinence-only is not working. It's a $1.5 billion program over the last ten years that has, quite frankly, failed. The CDC reported that one in five teenage girls between the ages of 14 and 19 are infected with STIs, and that, to me, is appalling and shameful. And in the age of information, these women are just not getting adequate information.

CHEN: So what do you want to see Congress do, and how much more money do you think we need to get there?

WALSH: I'm not sure -- I don't know exactly how much money, I just think where it's being appropriated, that there just needs -- in addition to abstinence, which is fine, there just needs to be a comprehensive sex education program, and we can't be relying on, you know, private foundations, or parents, or, you know, teens' peers, to be educating each other. We really do need government help on this. It's, you know, it's a shame to me that we spend money educating our kids on, you know, history, math, science, and English literature, and we -- we can't educate them sexually. And, you know, and it's proof in these -- in these statistics. It's just shameful to me that in our country that these young women are being infected because they honestly just don't have the information.

CHEN: And you think it's because we're saying only -- we're only talking about abstinence, we're not talking about protection or birth control, or things like that?

WALSH: Absolutely. Abstinence is one -- abstinence is one aspect of sex education, but it is not the complete aspect. And to expect, I think, everybody to remain abstinent is just -- it's like asking them not to grow. It's like we don't ask people to not try out for sports. We don't ask people to stop learning. It's just a natural human process, and we need to be educating people. If abstinence-only did work, we wouldn't be seeing these kind of statistics. We wouldn't be seeing these young women suffering like this.

CHEN: Yeah, I hear you. Kate Walsh, thank you and good luck to you.

WALSH: Thank you very much.

CHEN: You're welcome. We'll be right back.

—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

And who better than Julie

And who better than Julie Chen to introduce this segment?  After all, she taught us that you can become a network morning show host and a network game show host simply by sleeping with the boss.

Ouch!

Ouch!

Abstinence works when tried

Walsh: "Well, abstinence-only is not working."

It works just fine when people try it. Unfortunately Hollywood and Planned Parenthood, among others, can make a buck by undermining that message, telling impressionable kids they cannot control themselves.

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

Would anyone here know just

Would anyone here know just what exactly "abstinence-only" education is?  Is it that they only teach abstinence as the only method of birth control, or do they teach that abstinence is the only 100% reliable method of birth control and STD protection, and the only one that does not beget abortion, when contraceptive devices inevitably fail, or lead to STD, when condoms fail?  I would very much advocate the latter program, which isn't really "abstinence only" (sounds like more spin to me) -- i.e., there is nothing wrong with educating high schoolers about the various contraceptive devices, but they should also provide the facts that these devices are not only not 100% effective against pregnancy or STDs, but that, compared to other risks we face, they carry a relatively high risk.  For example, imagine boarding a plane if you were informed beforehand that the plane has a 1% chance of crashing (when piloted correctly), which increases to 10% when the occasional newbie pilots it?

Any sex education I've ever

Any sex education I've ever seen has always said that contraceptives were not 100% effective, and that the only 100% effective method was abstinence.

That being said, I think expecting 100% compliance with abstinence is 100% kooky talk. Arm kids with all the facts, and they're best prepared.

Abstinence Education-Not Abstinence-Only Education

I think expecting 100% compliance with abstinence is 100% kooky talk. Arm kids with all the facts, and they're best prepared.

The agreement for federal money was based on including abstinence education as PART OF sex ed not, to the exclusion of it. Abstinence, by definition, is to abstain. The Abstinence-Only label is a liberal canard to give a false impression of the rules for the federal funds to be awarded.

Intellectual Honesty

Thanks for verifying that -- I thought as much.  "Abstinence-Only" sounds like "we teach abstinency only," which most mainstream Americans would object to.  Another liberal-MSM spin.

Balboa: I don't think anyone here expects 100% compliance with abstinence any more than anyone expects 100% compliance with marriage vows.  But just because there are unfaithful spouses out there, that doesn't mean we should now promote infidelity in marriages ("men are gonna cheat anyway, so we might as well accept that, and while were at it, educate them on 'safe cheating...', and provide them with condoms everytime they leave the house").  No, the purpose of education is to provide hard cold facts, e.g.: "X% of married couples remain faithful, 100 - X% commit adultery, with Y% of these ending in divorces involving expensive alimony/child support, along with a good dose of psychological and emotional trauma.  Therefore, if you wanna play, be prepared to pay."

States refuse abstinence only funding.

If it did work, states would not turn down the funding. I do not see how anybody is promoting 'having sex". I also do not see how anybody is saying abstinence does not work. They are only saying if you decide to not wait for marriage, condoms and birth control pills are an alternative. So far 16 states have refused the free money from the government. How often  do you hear about states turning down free money?

 

shawn -- if the criterion

shawn -- if the criterion for tax payer funded Public Service messages is that they have to work 100%, then doesn't that rule out just about every tax funded public message.

Just say no!!! Don't drink and drive. No cell phones whilst driving, et al?

Vote 4 change. Vote 4 anything. See Jack & Mr Shy's first campaign ad for the ONLY viable 3rd party candidate.

Hi Jack

What I mean is abstinence only does work. As a father I hope my child does exactly that until she is married.

I find nothing wrong with schools teaching this excellent method, but there is nothing wrong with teaching about other measures in addition just in case children do not heed our words.

I just do not see how teaching about condoms and birth control pills is encouraging having sex.

 

Okay -- I see where you're

Okay -- I see where you're coming from!

Vote 4 change. Vote 4 anything. See Jack & Mr Shy's first campaign ad for the ONLY viable 3rd party candidate.

Other people

Probably can't see why teaching about those things ISN'T encouraging sex, though.

Your side and that side can and probably will argue forever under political control of education. Imagine, for a moment, the "win win" that would happen if the marketplace, rather than politics, made that decision instead.
JMR

A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.

"They are only saying if

"They are only saying if you decide to not wait for marriage, condoms and birth control pills are an alternative."

If they are saying that, then they are not saying the whole truth, which is: If you decide to not wait for marriage, condoms and birth control pills are a risky alternative.

lotr

Condoms are not 100 percent effective against disease and pregnancy, neither are pills against pregnancy and there are risks.

If someone decides to not stay abstinent, I sure would rather they used these methods, instead of unprotected sex.

I bet if people in Africa all used condoms, there would be at least a 98 percent drop in new HIV cases.

Yes, of course that's true

Yes, of course that's true -- condoms/contraceptive devices significantly reduce the risk associated with non-monogomous sex.  But what seems to get lost in the wash is that there is, nevertheless, risk involved.  That was my impression of what "abstinence-only" education is -- that outside of committed monogomous relations, abstinence is the only risk-free behavior.

Oh my sweet Kate Walsh

I'd like to "grow" with her, wink wink nudge nudge

Notice Chen's total knee-jerk reaction: "..and how much more money do you think we need to get there?"

 'Cause, you know, no matter what aspect of sex ed can and should be changed, it will HAVE to cost even more money into that pit of waste called public education!

Just once

Just once you would like to hear someone tell these talking heads the truth and say something like..."How the hell should I know, Im just a fricking actor."

practicing abstinence

WALSH: Well, abstinence-only is not working. It's a $1.5 billion program over the last ten years that has, quite frankly, failed. The CDC reported that one in five teenage girls between the ages of 14 and 19 are infected with STIs, and that, to me, is appalling and shameful.

Are those the numbers for those practicing abstinence? lol Certainly hormones are tough to deal with but more immorality means more problems.

Drop dead gorgeous woman...

...why is it they have the wrong ideals? These Hollywood hotties?

interesting

last night I actually decided that to just jot down some ideas about the recent study where 1 in 4 teenage girls has an STD, teen pregnancy, kids getting caught having sex in school, oral sex among middle schoolers . . .

I seriously blame TV

today teenagers watch shows like dawsons creek and other HS styled shows and movies where everyone is getting some action, when I was younger (I am only 32) whenever a show that had HS kids in it would even approach the virginity issue, it was always a very special episode and they ended up not doing it by the end of the episode, or shows like The Wonder Years where you saw other kids going through the same frustrating awkwardness

today TV and movies portray high school kids as suave casanova types who get plenty of action, and the mature girls that give it up to them . . . and kids must think it is normal I guess

and then there is hip hop, and yeah, I have no problem at all blaming that noise for problems, girls in music videos used to have to be trained in some sort of dancing, whether it be jazz or modern dance or even urban style or something, today, all you need is some T&A and no problem showing it off and having convulsions - that is not dancing in any sort of way that they would teach someone going through a real dance program

there were latchkey kids when I was a kid, but not this kind of behavior

To be fair, the first drama

To be fair, the first drama that really featured teens was 90210, wasn't it (OK, James at 17 was a drama, too)? My point being that shows about teens really didn't exist pre-90210. They were always on the show, but not the main focus.

Teens have been having sex in movies much longer than on TV. Molly Jorgenson and Bart Hunter were gettin' it on in 1959.

And just as in movies, there have been a fair number of shows to treat teen sex as a serious matter, too.

Hummmm...

" It's like we don't ask people to not try out for sports."

Sex is a sport? Whose team is this little tramp playing for?

Anyway, this hottie actress is way off base. Let's presume for a minute that we have other options besides abstinence...wait, what's that? It is considered statuatory rape under the age of consent to have sexual intercourse? So....what is the issue here?

Yeah teach about reproduction.... No problem there. I draw the line at promoting sexuality for kids under age as some sort of liberal "right". Mostly because it is ILLEGAL..... and really, I am sick of looking at their butts hanging out of their stupid Abercrombie pants when I am at the mall.

The MSM and the liberal elites in Hollywood want only one thing...to sell their media. This is one way...sex sells. It's just that they are peddling to MINORS. Stop it. And go away.

And while I am at it...you parents out there - get control of your kids. You brought 'em into this world...and you are responsible for them. Not hottie Mcfake doctor on Grey's Anatomy...

 

"All great change in America begins at the dinner table" Ronald Reagan, Jan 21, 1981

 Loved her anal shot in

 Loved her anal shot in "Black crackheads on white Hos'.

Loved her anal shot in "Black crackheads on white Hos'.

I did not know that Kate Walsh was in that movie. Maybe I have to pick that up this weekend. I got totally ripped off last week. I bought this tape and I thought it would be very provocative, but it was just fuzzy. The name of the tape was "head cleaner"

 

not the government!

"We can't be relying on, you know, private foundations, or parents, or, you know, teens' peers, to be educating each other. We really do need government help on this."

That is about the worst thing she could say. If she has kids, I dare her to give them to a government-run daycare center so she doesn't have to teach them anything. We desperately need to rely on parents (who know what they're doing).

On the Nosey!

Goldbough,

RIGHT ON THE MONEY. I missed that point. Glad you highlighted it. Nicely done.

"All great change in America begins at the dinner table" Ronald Reagan, Jan 21, 1981

Wonder what these mental

Wonder what these mental giants see as the end game here? All of the kids with dieses and pregnant and single, now thats a plan. Good grief

 

"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain

Well, no teenager in their

Well, no teenager in their right mind wants to be abstinent.  Heck, high school is the best time in one's lifetime for getting laid.  The government schools shouldn't be teaching abstinence or "safe sex".  I say let the parents worry about it all.

Teenagers need limits, steveba4

No teenager wants to eat a healthy diet, get exercise, study hard, get a good night's sleep, or stay away from drugs and alcohol. Should we allow them to live any way we like, or should we teach them what's best for them?

High school might be the best time to get laid, but kids that age often are not up to facing the consequences. Those consequences go beyond STD's and pregnancy, because sex is much more than a biological function.

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

"The government schools

"The government schools shouldn't be teaching abstinence or "safe sex""

Thats the whole point Kate Walsh is making. You should teach abstinence, but you should teach safe sex as well.

The schools have been

The schools have been teaching safe sex for decades, but quess what... 1 in 4 teen girls have an STD, recent study 3/12/08. How is that for safe sex?

How much of that stat

How much of that stat includes unprotected sex? I bet it would be lower if they all used condoms.

Again, I'm not saying condoms are fool proof, they are better than having unprotected sex.

I wasn't aware that the sex

I wasn't aware that the sex education curriculum in public schools included rolling condoms onto teenagers every time a young couple wanted to express its sexuality.  Because you know, all high school students complete all their homework. 

fitz

I wasn't aware that public schools rolled condoms onto teenagers every time a young couple wanted to express its sexualty. In fact i don't even know what you mean by that. I don't know what you mean by completing their homework either.

I guess it is over my liberal head.

It's just that people who

It's just that people who favor the government getting involved (through the schools) in sex education seem to be under the impression that the schools can make teenage pregnancy and STDs simply disappear because condom use is taught in the classroom.  Instructors can inform students all they want about condoms, teen pregnancy, STDs and all other issues related to sex and they're still not going to be able to make the difference they think they are.  A kid isn't going to put on a condom just because some dopey high school teacher jackhammers the party line into his head (or just because his school is using my tax money to hand out free condoms to him and his classmates).  Like the child who doesn't pay attention in class, many of the targeted kids are simply going to ignore their teachers.  If they want to have sex, condom or no, they're just going to do it...and since the school isn't going to be around to make sure condoms are used during every sexual encounter, their "education" amounts to a bunch of empty platitudes.  Many of these labor union drones that teach in public schools can't even teach their students math and language skills...and they can't even get them to complete their homework assignments.  Why the hell are we supposed to trust them with even more responsibility (like teaching sex ed) when we can't even trust them to teach their students the basics properly?  

I'm speaking to the arrogance of the public schools whose apologists seem to believe that they're to have control over every aspect of childrens' lives.  We're just supposed to ship them more money, they're to remain unaccountable to the taxpayers and if they fail, we're just supposed to shut up and ship them even more money (to reward them for being such failures, I guess).  Sorry, but before public schools stick their noses where they don't belong (like using our tax money to indoctrinate a captive audience into left-wing social engineering), they ought to start concerning themselves with learning how to teach Math and English properly.  Leave the parenting to parents.

I don't know if 'disappear'

I don't know if 'disappear' is the right term -- although I agree that some people think that way -- I imagine schools where teenage pregnancy is a real problem figure that any help from anywhere is much-needed. 

Sure, bal.  I understand

Sure, bal.  I understand that.  But I look at this along the same lines as I saw the Charles Barkley "role model" flap many years ago.  Somebody doesn't like the way he acts during a game or out on the town, so they get really self-righteous and call for his employers to sanction him for the benefit of "the children".  All of a sudden, Charles Barkley becomes responsible for some kid showboating or "acting up" towards an adult, the NBA and corporate sponsors have to get involved by constantly fining him or publicly terminating his endorsements...and you've essentially shifted the responsibility (both the good and bad aspects of the word) for raising children from the parents to a bunch of entertainers...or, in this case, a bunch of teachers.

Well, I think pro athletes

Well, I think pro athletes have their bosses over a barrel. They can do whatever they want a lot of the time and no one will say "boo" as long as they perform come game time. They don't hold their employees accountable because they need them too much. 

Of course, not enough fans vote with their dollars.  

Of course, not enough fans

Of course, not enough fans vote with their dollars.

And that's exactly the point.  If fans can't or won't muster the self-discipline to vote with their dollars and make the point that certain things are unacceptable, they're more responsible for creating and promoting the monsters than anyone else is...and they deserve what they get in return. 

Shawn, I'll make it simple

Shawn, I'll make it simple for you.

Abstinence = practicing self-disciplinary forethought and caution.

Condom use = practicing self-disciplinary forethought and caution.

Sure, one of these has more promise of "fun" than the other, but in either case you're still asking the teenager to practice self-disciplinary forethought and caution.

Now apply this to every other adult task that requires a certain amount of self-disciplinary forethought and caution:  Operating an automobile, prescription and non-prescription drug use, alcohol use, personal money management, self-care, time-management, early job responsibilities, etcetera.

There's your dilemma, and this is also why your priorities are mixed up.

-PJ   

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

Why people think this way...

Why do people think that abstinence only does not work? Because they are basing their thinking on the idea that people are descended from animals. After all, an animal just does what feels good or what it has the urge to do. By saying that people can not control themselves, the implication is that they can not stop their "animal urges".

This is why it is so important to teach more than just abstinence. One very valid point mentioned was discussing the consequences. Not only is abstinence the only 100% effective contraceptive, it is also the only way to guarantee no STD's.

Another reason to teach it though has to do with the beauty and wonder of sexuality. It is not just something people do, like animals. It is something reserved for marriage where two people give completely of themselves to join with the other person. Rather then making sex 'better' by being so "open" about it, what is often done is to bring it down to it's basest, most vulgar level. I think if we taught more of the beauty and sacredness of it, there would be more effort on the part of both teens and adults to treat it with the respect that it deserves.

and before anyone asks... Yes, I have healthy teenagers and we are doing our best to teach this. and NOT leaving it to the schools, government or even church...

Why? Because people are

Why? Because people are human. They make mistakes. They make bad decisions. Teenagers have a long history of listening to what parents and teachers tell them and then completely disregarding it. 

Let me guess... Kate Walsh

Let me guess... Kate Walsh doesn't have any children? Typical liberal and btw, abstinence works every time it is tried.