Abstract
AbstractThe CDC reports that 30% of high school students have engaged in sexual intercourse. Evidence suggests biological, personal, peer, societal, and family variables affect when a child will initiate sex. The school environment plays an important role in a child’s development. Evidence suggests that greater attachment to the school community can modify sexual risk-taking activity in adolescents. Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCWS) comprises a cohort of approximately 4,700 families of children born in the U.S. between 1998–2000, over-sampled for non-marital births in large U.S. cities. Adolescents (N = 3,444 of 4,663 eligible) completed the wave six teen survey at approximately age 15. School connectedness was self-reported with four items measuring inclusiveness, closeness, happiness, and safety felt by the adolescent in their school environment. Sexual intercourse and nonconsensual sex were self-reported by the adolescent. Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted examining sexual intercourse, nonconsensual sex, risk factors, and school connectedness. In this sample of adolescents (48% female, 49% Black, 25% Hispanic, ages 14–19), school connectedness appears to reduce boys’ risk of nonconsensual sex (OR = 0.29, p < 0.01), and reduce girls’ risk of engaging in sexual intercourse (OR = 0.55, p < 0.01). Findings suggest gender differences in the association between school connectedness and sexual practices in adolescents. School connectedness may confer protection for boys’ risk of nonconsensual sex, and for girls’ risk of engaging in sexual intercourse. Further exploration of the relationship between school connectedness may allow for recommendations into preventative measures for teenage sexual behaviors.
Funder
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
National Institute on Drug Abuse
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference78 articles.
1. Ali, M. M., & Dwyer, D. S. (2011). Estimating peer effects in sexual behavior among adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 34(1), 183–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.008
2. Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 795.
3. Anyanwu, F. C., Akinsola, H. A., Tugli, A. K., & Obisie-Nmehielle, N. (2020). A qualitative assessment of the influence of family dynamics on adolescents’ sexual risk behaviour in a migration-affected community. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 15(1), 1717322.
4. Banvard-Fox, C., Linger, M., Paulson, D. J., Cottrell, L., & Davidov, D. M. (2020). Sexual Assault in Adolescents. Primary Care, 47(2), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pop.2020.02.010
5. Basile, K. C., Smith, S. G., Breiding, M., Black, M. C., & Mahendra, R. R. (2014). Sexual violence surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended data elements. Version 2.0. Atlanta (GA): National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.