Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Debate over sex ed
By Rebekah Danaher
Daily News staff writer
Committee members, citizens speak out to board
Arguments over the Human Growth and Development curriculum that began at the School District of Beloit's Oct. 12 meeting flared again Tuesday night.
At the school board's regular meeting, both sides in the debate - those advocating more abstinence emphasis and those favoring a more comprehensive scope - came armed with statistics and sources supporting their position.
Board President John Winkelmann opened the public forum by stating the community's input was valuable to the board in deciding how to proceed with the proposed curriculum.
"This is the process that is most important, the process of discussion" he said. "I look at it as a positive opportunity."
The meeting's agenda provided for comments from the Human Growth and Development (HGD) committee members and several addressed the gathering in defense of the recommendations.
Philip Allen said claims that the curriculum teaches abstinence only are false. Many other issues are addressed in the curriculum, said Allen.
However, Allen gave his reasons for believing abstinence should be stressed, noting that most importantly, it is illegal for the students of middle school age to be engaging in sexual intercourse.
Christine Bauer told the board that turning over the curriculum, the product of a year-and-a-half of committee planning, to the PTA and PTO and other individuals for revision would abolish any progress that had been made and would delay the process indefinitely.
Bauer reminded the board that it had trusted the committee with drafting a curriculum in line with state requirements. The teaching of topics on homosexuality, abortion and masturbation are not included in state requirements, she said.
"We teach our children to say no to drugs, why not say no to sex?" she asked.
Pawel Olszewski, a doctor at Beloit Memorial Hospital and Beloit Clinic and a member of the committee, presented a detailed list of sexually transmitted diseases (STD) and their common side effects, adding that not all STDs exhibit symptoms.
"STDs are dangerous and do not discriminate" he said.
Condoms are not safe enough, according to Olszewski.
"There is a 2 to4 percent mechanical failure rate in condoms," he said.
Against the transmission of HIV, condoms are only 87 percent successful.
"I'm stating scientific facts," he said. "Children have the right to know all the scientific facts."
Committee member Pam Charles said the most important information students need to know is how dangerous casual sex is to them.
Charles said she was saddened to hear at the last meeting on the HGD curriculum a young woman tell the audience that high schoolers are having sex and need to be informed of abortion options.
"If you need an abortion, then you probably have an STD," Charles said. "We need to teach kids marriage is the best option. I'm not imposing my morals. I did the research."
Charles said not informing teens of the risk of condoms borders on criminal negligence.
Alice Olson, a school administrator, provided the dissenting voice of the committee, saying she agreed to the proposed curriculum but did so unwillingly.
Olson said she worried the curriculum was not comprehensive and stopped short of providing enough information for inquisitive students.
An all-inclusive curriculum, she said, would add the sensitive issues of homosexuality, masturbation and abortion to the list of discussed topics.
Deb Karpfinger-Goodwine, a teacher at Aldrich Middle School and former committee member, thanked the board for questioning the curriculum and the committee for its dedication to the project.
She said she saw many good elements of the curriculum but was concerned about the wording of important phrases.
She requested that a sentence defining the union of a sperm and egg as "life" be changed to "fertilization."
She also said that teachers should be able to respond to students' queries into the sensitive issues.
"The topics do come up," she said. "I think it is important to have accurate information given to them at school."
Following the committee's statements, members of the community rose to take turns at the podium.
Mallory Saurer told the board that a curriculum without provisions for homosexual education would sanction hate speech toward homosexuals. Teaching homosexuality, she said, would emphasize diversity.
"I find the draft to be pretty narrow in scope," said Mark Batterman.
The curriculum, he said, would work well in a perfect world. He urged the board to adopt a curriculum that recognizes the reality that Beloit students know.
Katie White, a high school student, said she felt she
needed to clarify her statements at the last meeting, saying that she was not boasting about the sexuality of her peers or suggesting that abortion should be promoted, merely that it should be taught.
White urged the audience to read one of the curriculum's recommended pamphlets, "Why Marriage." The pamphlet, she said, makes claims about marriage without backing them with evidence. White told of her friend who has a new baby, despite using protection, and is now attending university. Don Hilbig, a clinical social worker, said the adults in the room needed to be reminded that the curriculum is designed to educate children.
"I think we're here to help children learn and grow," Hilbig said. "Children need protection from the adult world."
It is intrusive to the point of abuse to expect children to sit through discussions on homosexuality, abortion and masturbation, Hilbig said.
The schools should be protecting children's innocence, he added.
"I've reviewed the curriculum," said Sara Zibert, a doctor at Beloit Memorial Hospital, "and these guys are not pioneers."
Zibert explained that much of the material gathered by the curriculum committee is typical of sex education programs.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends this information, said Zibert.
One point that had not been raised, said Zibert, is the issue of self-esteem. In teaching abstinence, students will understand that it is OK to say no, she said.
Tia Johnson, a biologist at Lloyd College, also took issue with the draft's definition of the fusion of a sperm and egg as new life, claiming that it could not be proved scientifically.
She also expressed her concern at the exclusion of information on homosexuality.
"Ten percent of Americans are homosexual," she said. "Let's not do them a disservice."
Anita Williams said she felt the draft's refusal to address the sensitive issues would create an aura of mystery around the subjects.
"Where else in the curriculum would we discourage students from asking questions?" challenged Williams.
Abstinence is laudable, she said but needs to be supplemented and reinforced with other information.
Brad Liggett expressed his complete support for the curriculum draft, saying that he as a father has the sole responsibility of educating his children on controversial issues like abortion.
Pat Robinson, the final citizen to speak, responded to the repeated accusations that the curriculum relies on scare tactics to emphasize abstinence.
"These are the facts," she said. "If they scare the kids to abstain, good."
Winkelmann thanked all the citizens on behalf of the board, assuring them that their concerns would be weighted in the board's consideration of the curriculum.
Members of the board plan to discuss the curriculum with the committee before making any decisions.
Arguments over the Human Growth and Development curriculum that began at the School District of Beloit's Oct. 12 meeting flared again Tuesday night.
At the school board's regular meeting, both sides in the debate - those advocating more abstinence emphasis and those favoring a more comprehensive scope - came armed with statistics and sources supporting their position.
Board President John Winkelmann opened the public forum by stating the community's input was valuable to the board in deciding how to proceed with the proposed curriculum.
"This is the process that is most important, the process of discussion" he said. "I look at it as a positive opportunity."
The meeting's agenda provided for comments from the Human Growth and Development (HGD) committee members and several addressed the gathering in defense of the recommendations.
Philip Allen said claims that the curriculum teaches abstinence only are false. Many other issues are addressed in the curriculum, said Allen.
However, Allen gave his reasons for believing abstinence should be stressed, noting that most importantly, it is illegal for the students of middle school age to be engaging in sexual intercourse.
Christine Bauer told the board that turning over the curriculum, the product of a year-and-a-half of committee planning, to the PTA and PTO and other individuals for revision would abolish any progress that had been made and would delay the process indefinitely.
Bauer reminded the board that it had trusted the committee with drafting a curriculum in line with state requirements. The teaching of topics on homosexuality, abortion and masturbation are not included in state requirements, she said.
"We teach our children to say no to drugs, why not say no to sex?" she asked.
Pawel Olszewski, a doctor at Beloit Memorial Hospital and Beloit Clinic and a member of the committee, presented a detailed list of sexually transmitted diseases (STD) and their common side effects, adding that not all STDs exhibit symptoms.
"STDs are dangerous and do not discriminate" he said.
Condoms are not safe enough, according to Olszewski.
"There is a 2 to4 percent mechanical failure rate in condoms," he said.
Against the transmission of HIV, condoms are only 87 percent successful.
"I'm stating scientific facts," he said. "Children have the right to know all the scientific facts."
Committee member Pam Charles said the most important information students need to know is how dangerous casual sex is to them.
Charles said she was saddened to hear at the last meeting on the HGD curriculum a young woman tell the audience that high schoolers are having sex and need to be informed of abortion options.
"If you need an abortion, then you probably have an STD," Charles said. "We need to teach kids marriage is the best option. I'm not imposing my morals. I did the research."
Charles said not informing teens of the risk of condoms borders on criminal negligence.
Alice Olson, a school administrator, provided the dissenting voice of the committee, saying she agreed to the proposed curriculum but did so unwillingly.
Olson said she worried the curriculum was not comprehensive and stopped short of providing enough information for inquisitive students.
An all-inclusive curriculum, she said, would add the sensitive issues of homosexuality, masturbation and abortion to the list of discussed topics.
Deb Karpfinger-Goodwine, a teacher at Aldrich Middle School and former committee member, thanked the board for questioning the curriculum and the committee for its dedication to the project.
She said she saw many good elements of the curriculum but was concerned about the wording of important phrases.
She requested that a sentence defining the union of a sperm and egg as "life" be changed to "fertilization."
She also said that teachers should be able to respond to students' queries into the sensitive issues.
"The topics do come up," she said. "I think it is important to have accurate information given to them at school."
Following the committee's statements, members of the community rose to take turns at the podium.
Mallory Saurer told the board that a curriculum without provisions for homosexual education would sanction hate speech toward homosexuals. Teaching homosexuality, she said, would emphasize diversity.
"I find the draft to be pretty narrow in scope," said Mark Batterman.
The curriculum, he said, would work well in a perfect world. He urged the board to adopt a curriculum that recognizes the reality that Beloit students know.
Katie White, a high school student, said she felt she
needed to clarify her statements at the last meeting, saying that she was not boasting about the sexuality of her peers or suggesting that abortion should be promoted, merely that it should be taught.
White urged the audience to read one of the curriculum's recommended pamphlets, "Why Marriage." The pamphlet, she said, makes claims about marriage without backing them with evidence. White told of her friend who has a new baby, despite using protection, and is now attending university. Don Hilbig, a clinical social worker, said the adults in the room needed to be reminded that the curriculum is designed to educate children.
"I think we're here to help children learn and grow," Hilbig said. "Children need protection from the adult world."
It is intrusive to the point of abuse to expect children to sit through discussions on homosexuality, abortion and masturbation, Hilbig said.
The schools should be protecting children's innocence, he added.
"I've reviewed the curriculum," said Sara Zibert, a doctor at Beloit Memorial Hospital, "and these guys are not pioneers."
Zibert explained that much of the material gathered by the curriculum committee is typical of sex education programs.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends this information, said Zibert.
One point that had not been raised, said Zibert, is the issue of self-esteem. In teaching abstinence, students will understand that it is OK to say no, she said.
Tia Johnson, a biologist at Lloyd College, also took issue with the draft's definition of the fusion of a sperm and egg as new life, claiming that it could not be proved scientifically.
She also expressed her concern at the exclusion of information on homosexuality.
"Ten percent of Americans are homosexual," she said. "Let's not do them a disservice."
Anita Williams said she felt the draft's refusal to address the sensitive issues would create an aura of mystery around the subjects.
"Where else in the curriculum would we discourage students from asking questions?" challenged Williams.
Abstinence is laudable, she said but needs to be supplemented and reinforced with other information.
Brad Liggett expressed his complete support for the curriculum draft, saying that he as a father has the sole responsibility of educating his children on controversial issues like abortion.
Pat Robinson, the final citizen to speak, responded to the repeated accusations that the curriculum relies on scare tactics to emphasize abstinence.
"These are the facts," she said. "If they scare the kids to abstain, good."
Winkelmann thanked all the citizens on behalf of the board, assuring them that their concerns would be weighted in the board's consideration of the curriculum.
Members of the board plan to discuss the curriculum with the committee before making any decisions.
 |
||
| Finding the 'courage to change' |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of beloitdailynews.com.
Submit a Comment
Login below to post your comment. |
Not yet a member? Use the form below to register. |
