Public School- Sexual Abstinence

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

crazyheart

Rest In Peace: tomorrow,tomorrow
Simons: Christian sex ed in public schools an infringement of human rights, say Edmonton mother, daughter
By Paula Simons, Edmonton Journal July 10, 2014 2:11 PM
.sharebar .recomm {float:left;width:120px;} .sharebar .tweet {float:left;width:100px;} .sharebar .plusone {float:left;width:80px;} .sharebar .comment {float:left;width:120px;} .sharebar .pinitbutton {float:left;width:80px;}
Comment
300

10015902.jpg

[paste:font size="4"]Kathy Dawson and daughter Emily have filed a human-rights complaint alleging the Edmonton Public School District’s use of a Christian fundamentalist abstinence education program infringed upon their rights as non-Christians.

Photograph by: Ed Kaiser , Edmonton Journal
EDMONTON - An Edmonton teenager and her mother have successfully filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, alleging the Edmonton Public School District’s use of a Christian-based abstinence education program infringed upon their rights as non-Christians.
Last July, Emily Dawson, then 17, was enrolled in a summer course of Career and Life Management at McNally High School. No Alberta high school student can graduate without taking CALM, a mandatory course.
Under Section 11 of Alberta’s Human Rights Act, parents have a right to be notified in advance if their children are going to be taught about sex, sexual orientation, or religion and to exempt their children from such classes.
The parental rights clause was introduced by the Stelmach government to placate social conservatives upset by the addition of sexual orientation to Alberta’s human rights code.
Dawson’s mother Kathy, an agnostic who supports sex education, signed the permission slip for Emily to attend CALM’s sexual education classes. She was shocked when Emily texted her to say the “sex ed” class was being taught by an anti-abortion activist, from the American-based Pregnancy Care Centre.
The group provides free abstinence education to about 60 Edmonton-area junior highs and high schools each year, most in the Edmonton Public district.
“She did a lot of slut-shaming to the women, and pointed out the guys as horn-dogs,” Emily says. “She really ridiculed single-parent families, she made it sound like they all give birth to juvenile delinquents.”
One classmate, Emily claims, asked about same-sex relationships.
“All those questions were shut down right away. She just said, ‘We’re not here to discuss that.’ ”
Kathy asked to have her daughter excused from the next lecture. She claims she was told there was no way her child could skip the class without academic penalty. So she insisted on sitting in the next class to hear the lecture for herself. Kathy says there was no mention of God or Jesus but, she alleges, all the arguments in favour of chastity until marriage or against divorce and abortion were deeply rooted in Christian doctrine.
The Dawsons’ complaints allege the presenter taught students that 60 per cent of boys carry the HPV sexually transmitted infection under their fingernails, that gonorrhea can kill you in three days, that girls should dress modestly to avoid inflaming boys. The allegations have not been proven.
“It’s values-based sex ed and all the values are evangelical values,” Kathy says. “It’s not even mainstream Christianity. I’m not against abstinence. But I think the message is diminished when it’s surrounded by misinformation and fear.”
She wrote to trustees about her concerns. She started a petition. The board, meanwhile, endorsed the Pregnancy Care Centre’s sex education curriculum. So Kathy and Emily, now 18 and a high school graduate, took legal action. In April they filed a complaint alleging they suffered discrimination because they were agnostics and because of their family status as a single-parent home. Kathy has also filed a complaint under Section 11, arguing that the board infringed her parental rights by failing to give her advance notice of the course content, then refusing to let her remove her daughter from the class without academic penalty.
This week the commission agreed to pursue the matter. It does not comment on complaints in progress. But Lisa Austin, who speaks for the public board, says the district is reviewing the complaint.
Neither board chair Sarah Hoffman nor superintendent Darrel Robertson was available for comment Wednesday.
But in a presentation last month, Robertson said two EPSB staff had attended a Pregnancy Care Centre lecture and found it “a scientifically sound presentation, which was inclusive, respectful of individual differences and without religious content.”
Kathy Dawson wonders if those staffers got a toned-down version.
“They’re going to present differently when adults are there,” she says.
Meantime, the district says parents will be notified about the content of the presentations and given the opportunity to exempt their children.
Yet the letter currently being sent to parents makes no mention of the Pregnancy Care Centre’s Christian mission nor its pro-life advocacy. It merely says controversial subjects will be discussed from a variety of views.
It’s absurd. CALM isn’t religion class. That’s not what parents sign up for. Sex education in our local public schools should be delivered in a scientific, non-judgmental way, by qualified professionals, not outsourced to an American-based pro-life lobby group.
Emily and Kathy Dawson have inspired an important public debate about the nature of our public schools. They deserve our thanks for their courage in speaking out.
psimons@edmontonjournal.com
[URL='http://twitter.com/Paulatics']Twitter.com/Paulatics[/URL]
[EMAIL='psimons@edmontonjournal.com']Paula Simons is on Facebook. To join the conversation, go to [URL='http://facebook.com/EJPaulaSimons']facebook.com/EJPaulaSimons[/URL] or visit her blog at [URL='http://edmontonjournal.com/Paulatics']edmontonjournal.com/Paulatics[/URL]
[EMAIL='psimons@edmontonjournal.com']



[URL='http://wondercafe2.ca/javascript:photoClick(2,2,'',' - Photo Click Previous');']Previous[/URL]
[EMAIL='psimons@edmontonjournal.com'][URL='http://wondercafe2.ca/javascript:photoClick(2,2,'',' - Photo Click Next');']Next[/URL]
[EMAIL='psimons@edmontonjournal.com']

Kathy Dawson and daughter Emily have filed a human-rights complaint alleging the Edmonton Public School District’s use of a Christian fundamentalist abstinence education program infringed upon their rights as non-Christians.
Photograph by: Ed Kaiser, Edmonton Journal[/paste:font]






[/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL]
 
I think there is a serious issue with the way sex ed is taught in schools. I realize you tend to only hear about the bad, but we talked about it in university and it seemed like everyone had something bad to say about it. I had issues at all the levels though. Misinformation in elementary, inappropriate in jr. high (that's just my opinion) and in high school we were told there were activities we didn't have to participate in, but when it's go to this side or the room or that depending on an answer that's difficult. They questioned those who didn't go to the more popular answer.

Chemguy's (Catholic school) was just completely inadequate, along with the other Catholic schools.
 
As for bringing in outside people, in my experience that was the best part in high school. They had someone who was HIV+ come and talk to us and give one of the STI lessons.

The situation in this story shows that bringing in outside people isn't always a great choice. The person and organization should be more carefully selected, and the lesson plan should be reviewed.
 
Boots, I don't get why there is such a huge difference. Isn't it all supposed to be the same curriculum?!
 
I thought so. Now I took my CALM class in central Alberta in the mid 90's so it is possible that things have changed.

I always just asumed that all sex ed classes in high school was done by health nurses.

The sex ed classes in elementary and jounior high were taught by our teachers of our gender. Female students had a female teacher and males had male teachers.

My children so far has been taught in the same fashion but they are currently in the same school district as was I.
 
In elementary, we were together for most of the sex ed classes. We did have a gender specific class, I think it was just 1 class every grade, but maybe it was 2. Jr. high we were together for all of them. We were supposed to have it every year, but sometimes the school just didn't make time for it. I think it was only 1/3 years I actually had it.

In high school, it was the CALM teacher. Someone was also brought in to show all the different contraceptive methods, but the CALM teacher taught some of that class too.
 
Boots, I don't get why there is such a huge difference. Isn't it all supposed to be the same curriculum?!
Its a long time since I was in school, and almost as long since I taught, but I know that teachers have a great deal of power and responsibility in the way they interpret and present topics. The curriculum gives a broad outline. The teacher decides which sections will be emphasized and which skipped over, she can add little bits of information from her own observations, mention other sources of information that might bare checking out, praise and encourage students who give the answers she is looking for, frown or dismiss students who give the wrong answers, lead discussions in the direction she wishes them to take. An anti-abortion teacher can find ways to let the students know that this is the 'right' way to think and make pro-choice students look selfish, misinformed, irresponsible, immoral. She can have the class wondering why a good, Christian girl might even want to know about birth-control.
I remember my daughter being very upset about a teacher using posters supplied by a anti-abortion group and advising her friend, who had recently had an abortion, to find a way to skip the class. (my daughter had a morning class - her friend an afternoon one). Apparently two teachers at the large high school were teaching this course. Almost everybody in my daughter's class wished that they were in the other class. I wished she was too. I knew the teacher that my daughter didn't have. She'd spent much of her summer 'holidays' searching for material to round out and develop the curriculum she had been given. Apparently the other teacher did too, but from different sources.
 
Back in 1969 - the Etobicoke Board of Education - seeking to find the right age to introduce sex education into schools - tried teaching classes in it at various grade levels. Of all the students in Etobicoke - my grade one class was selected to be the guinea pigs representing the youngest age that was tested. As a result - my classmates and I received sex ed when we were 5-6 years old.
 
Really jae - what were they teaching?

That was about 45 years ago - so my memory is a bit hazy.

It involved showing us a filmstrip. From what I can recall it discussed the difference between male and female body parts - and the very basics of straight sex and how babies are formed.

The day we watched it was the same day my teacher took us on a field trip to the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair.

At supper in my family we used to go around the table and each person got to say the most interesting thing that happened to them on that day. When my Dad asked me - he later said - he thought I was going to tell everyone about the Fair.
 
Sex Ed in my High School was taught by an unmarried female teacher. It was coldly clinical and factual. Actually I was thinking about this the other day and realised that at no point in my childhood did I ever learn that intercourse could be a fun way to play with a partner. I tend to think that abstinence is the best answer for children, but also think they need to know about birth control methods and how to access them. Sex Ed classes seem to be a bad way to deal with the topic of a possible loving god.
 
UU's actually have a sex ed curriculum called OWL (Our Whole Lives). Teachers have to receive a special training course and there are components for various ages and stages of life (yes, it starts at Kindergarten, but they don't get heavily into the mechanics of it at that stage). Alas, my fellowship has stopped offering it due to lack of volunteers (we're lucky to have enough teachers for regular RE) but it much closer to what I would like see in society overall.
 
I don't honestly remember sex ed until I was in Grade 5, and I don't remember much after. This was in Scarborough in the mid 70's. It was basic factual information about sperm and eggs and how the sperm gets to the eggs. I don't remember any suggestion that the process of getting sperm to egg was supposed to be pleasurable. It was very clinical. My biggest memory of it is a film strip that was shown, and the uncomfortable and nervous giggling that broke out among both boys and girls when a male and female silhouette was shown and it was explained where people grow body hair as they get older. I do remember Mr. Curley (the teacher) stopping the film at that point and yelling at us all to behave like grown ups. Of course, we were 10-11 years old. We didn't act like grown ups. We giggled like kids. I don't think Mr. Curley liked teaching sex ed.
 
I think starting it from Kindergarten is a good idea, although it doesn't need to be sex ed. Just a basic health or science class that it's incorporated into.

We started in grade 4, well after some kids start puberty.
 
revsdd,

i hope you never stop giggling like a kid (especially during sex); sounds like your sex ed class was the right form of entertaining
 
UU's actually have a sex ed curriculum called OWL (Our Whole Lives). Teachers have to receive a special training course and there are components for various ages and stages of life (yes, it starts at Kindergarten, but they don't get heavily into the mechanics of it at that stage). Alas, my fellowship has stopped offering it due to lack of volunteers (we're lucky to have enough teachers for regular RE) but it much closer to what I would like see in society overall.
Mendalla, would this be taught in public school, a private school, home schooling, or as a separate enrichment course offered by your church?
 
Mendalla, would this be taught in public school, a private school, home schooling, or as a separate enrichment course offered by your church?

It is offered by the church, sometimes as a separate program, sometimes as part of religious education.
 
Back
Top