SIECUS

Controversy Report: 2009-2010 School Year

***SPECIAL REPORT***

SEX EDUCATION IN THE OBAMA ERA:

Comprehensive Sex Education Advocates Succeed in Their Efforts,

Though Many Obstacles Persist

Controversy Report 2009-2010 School Year

by Brianne Edwards, Community Advocacy Intern

The 2009-2010 school year saw many great strides towards more comprehensive sexuality education. With the support and advocacy of students, parents, school board members, and progressive lawmakers, districts have increasingly left behind abstinence-only programs. Additionally, as seen in previous years, many of these changes can be attributed to alarm about increased teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection (STI) rates in some communities. While SIECUS encourages schools and communities to implement comprehensive sexuality education programs to improve and sustain overall health, any step towards eliminating inadequate, abstinence-only programs is a step in the right direction.

Of course, there have been obstacles along the way. For decades, in many communities a vocal minority of school and community stakeholders have objected to any recommendation favoring comprehensive approaches. Whether trying to ban a book or high school play that deals with sensitive sexuality-related issues, or objecting to a classroom curriculum that acknowledges sexual orientation, many opponents have made it quite clear that the fight to increase access to comprehensive information is not over.

This report will refer to ‘sex education’ and ‘sexuality education’ interchangeably, recognizing that people across the political spectrum say ‘sex education’ when referring to a wide array of educational programs and curricula.

While the Obama administration has not fully lived up to the expectations of many sex education advocates, as it did not end all abstinence-only funding as promised, increased funding for medically accurate and evidence-based teen pregnancy prevention programs has spurred state and local governments to reevaluate their current policies. In fear of losing more federal and state funding for abstinence-only programs, many districts have opted to apply for sex education funding.

For 16 years, SIECUS has been tracking and providing analysis on thousands of controversies regarding sex education in communities across the Unites States. Our annual special report aims to illustrate and explain trends in sex education that SIECUS has monitored during the 2009-2010 school year.

TEEN PREGNANCY PANIC MOTIVATES CHANGE

In the 2009-2010 school year, high teen pregnancy rates were a major catalyst for challenging abstinence-only programs and adopting more comprehensive programs. This is an ongoing trend, since the success of sex education programs is often only measured in public health terms, such as a decline in the teen pregnancy rate or STIs. Changes in law or policy are often triggered when, despite a consistent decrease in teen pregnancy and STI rates in the United States overall, some specific communities still face a steady increase in these rates. Community members are often taken aback by surveys which show that youth in their community are engaging in “risky behaviors,” including premarital or unprotected sex.

In September 2009, school committee members in Springfield, MA voted unanimously to approve a health curriculum that would return “physiology, anatomy, sexual education and other areas taught more than 20 years ago” to instruction for seventh through 10^th graders.¹ Despite the fact that these topics were covered in the past, they were eventually eliminated through fiscal and staff cuts. While Massachusetts law does not require districts to implement any sex education program, it urges districts to teach HIV/AIDS prevention and also suggests adopting sex education curricula that discusses teen pregnancy, family violence, sound health practices, and sexual orientation.²

The recommendation to adopt a more comprehensive curriculum, which included information on contraceptives, including condoms, came from the Springfield Adolescent Sexual Health Advisory council, in an effort to reduce teen pregnancy and STI rates. Parents have also made many claims to the school board, voicing concern over the insufficient sex education their children were receiving. For many years, Springfield’s teen pregnancy rates have ranked either 1^st or 2^nd in the state, with a rate of 84 teen pregnancies per 1,000 births, which is 3½ percent higher than the average in Massachusetts.³

The director of the city’s health and human services stated, “It is a curriculum that we believe is comprehensive, science-based, and will give our children information they need.”⁴ However, the new curriculum is still based on an abstinence-first model. “We lead with, obviously, abstinence, but we have to be realistic,” said the Springfield Mayor, who commissioned the council.⁵

Taking the lead from Springfield, Holyoke, MA adopted similar provisions for a more comprehensive sex education policy. After the release of the Department of Public Health report in late March 2010, it was discovered that Holyoke had the highest teen birth rate in the state, with over 115 births for every 1,000 females ages 15-19.⁶ This rate is over five times the state average. In light of this fact, the school board took quick action to expand their current sex education curriculum, which runs from elementary through high school.

City educators have been working with the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy and a city task force developed more than a year ago by the Mayor of Holyoke to select one of a number of recommended science-based programs. The study was funded with a $9,000 state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education grant, according to the director of curriculum for Holyoke. ⁷

Representatives from local organizations, students, and parents attended the school committee meeting to lobby for the expansions. Now, freshman will receive about three weeks of sex education classes, expanded from the three to four sessions they previously received. The program includes information on birth control, abstinence, unhealthy relationships, and STIs.⁸

In Manatee County, FL, school board members openly questioned the district’s abstinence-focused program. After it was reported that over 500 Manatee County teens gave birth in 2008, one of the highest pregnancy rates among counties in Florida, school board members admitted that it is obvious that they “need to use other initiatives in addition to abstinence only.”⁹ District officials were also alarmed by the large increase in middle school students becoming pregnant.

A task force was created to address the issue and to evaluate the various teen pregnancy prevention programs that were under consideration. In the 2010-2011 school year, committee members will continue to hold conversations with the task force as well as other community members to determine the next course of action.

Challenges to abstinence-only programs also occurred in Texas after exceptionally high teen pregnancy rates were discovered. In Ector County, TX, headlines in September 2009 warned community members that 22% of all local teenage girls get pregnant, one of the highest rates in the nation.¹⁰ In response, Ector County school board trustees heard a presentation on ways to lower teen pregnancy and STI rates. Many insisted that the current Life Center Curriculum, an abstinence-based program, would be proven effective if given more time.

Others voiced doubt. “I am concerned…similar programs have been questionable at the state and national level,” said board president Donna Smith.¹¹ The district decided to keep the current abstinence-only curriculum, mandated by Texas state law, but also agreed to search for additional strategies to lower rates of teen pregnancy.

In March, a committee of community members, parents, and administrators approved by Ector County Independent School District’s board of trustees, began to review programs for secondary school students, who had no curriculum at the time. This committee recommended the “abstinence plus” curriculum “Big Decisions.” If approval to hire two health specialists is given, the program will begin being taught in the 2010-2011 school year.¹²

The curriculum would be taught in three to four day-long presentations discussing character and self-respect. In addition, doctors and medical students of Texas Tech would give a one-day presentation with basic information on avoiding sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and pregnancy.

In Krum, TX, school board members voted in December 2009 to add an additional week-long human sexuality course, along with the abstinence course currently being offered, in an effort to lower high teen pregnancy rates in their community. “Every ten minutes a girl is getting pregnant in Texas,” said Dr. Nina Rios-Doria, a licensed professional counselor, “so we need to look at what we can do different, overall.”¹³

The courses, put together by school nurses, would be taught in five 45-minute classes over a one-week period. “Sixth- through eighth-graders would hear lessons relating to relationship building skills, self-esteem issues and the consequences of decisions regarding sexual activity. The high school curriculum…could be more devoted to medical, legal and psychosocial issues relating to sex,” according to a local school nurse.¹⁴

While the school superintendent acknowledges that not all parents will be comfortable with this addition, he and many others believe it is a step in the right direction. It was also noted in a recent board meeting that not all parents are comfortable having sex education discussions with their children, making it necessary for these topics to be taught in school.

School board members in the Midland, TX Independent School District are also considering adding a sex education curriculum to their schools, which have not had any sex education for the past four years. Discussion arose when, in a relatively small school district, more than 130 students became pregnant, and over 100 were already parents. Pregnancy rates in Midland have consistently risen 1% to 2% each year.¹⁶

A Student Health Advisory Council was formed, consisting of parents, students, clergy members, and a gynecologist to give the board educated recommendations on possible curricula. They conducted a community survey to see what community members think would be appropriate to teach at each grade level. With over 850 responses, nearly 90% believe that some sort of sex education should be taught in school, and only 16.6% were opposed to an “abstinence plus” curriculum.¹⁷These are surprisingfindings because Texas is traditionally one of the most conservative states regarding sex education.

“The curriculum we'd be looking for would affect a large number of kids. It would cover more than sex. There are a lot of issues -- self-esteem, healthy relationships, body image issues -- that need to be addressed. We can't wait until seventh, eighth or ninth grade before we talk about sex,” said Tracey Dees, MISD Health Services Supervisor.¹⁸ The school board committee is taking recommendations for a sex education curriculum throughout the 2010-2011 school year. They hope that a curriculum will be implemented by the 2011-2012 school year.

In October 2009, community members were shocked when it was announced that 115 out of 800 female students were pregnant or were already parenting in Robeson High School in Chicago, IL. That is about one out of every seven female students.¹⁹ While the school already teaches preventative measures on pregnancy and STDs in its health courses, it is making efforts to create additional support options for the teen mothers.

There is already a teen parent program offered, and a daycare center for teenage mothers is being constructed across from the high school. The principal of Robeson High and other community members are hoping to create supportive, nonjudgmental environments for those who have given birth. “We're not looking at them like 'Ooh you made a mistake,'“ principal Gerald Morrow said. “We're looking at how we can get them to the next phase, how can we still get them thinking about graduation?” ²⁰

SCHOOLS DEBATE ACCESS TO CONTRACEPTION

Many communities have begun discussing contraception access to teens, compelled by high teen pregnancy rates. Again, with increasing access and progressive discussions, controversies have arisen, with the opposition to comprehensive sex education arguing that contraception access is inappropriate in schools and will encourage teen sex. Regardless of these protests, the majority of cases have taken the leap towards more support options and access for sexually active teens.

In North Berwick, ME, school board members voted to allow contraceptive services into Noble High School. Their decision was based upon high teen pregnancy and STI rates in the community. Services available at the school “include pregnancy testing, STD testing, pelvic exams, contraception, prescriptions, and condom availability.”²¹Counseling on abstinence and parental involvement sessions are also offered. The board decided to not distribute the morning after pill. Students are not allowed any contraception services without a release form signed by a parent.

In January 2010, parents in opposition to the contraception services available at Noble High began a petition to end all services. They argued that while such services are important, it is not the role of the school system to offer them. Other parents argued that they’re losing parental rights and control. Despite these efforts, however, contraceptive services have continued. Cindy Dolben, Noble High School nurse said, “One board member said we'd give it a year, see how it's going and revisit it then. I think this is what is best for our students and our families.”²²

In November 2009, voters in Revere, MA voted against a controversial ballot initiative that would have ended all contraception services in its high school. It was defeated in a 3,404-2,695 vote, after it was placed on the ballot in September when citizens objected to the policy implemented earlier in 2009.²³

The services provided by the school, including contraception access, distribution of condoms, and the morning after pill, are only accessible with permission from the student’s parent. The policy was approved after a survey indicated increasing rates of teen pregnancy and STIs among local teen populations. Services are overseen by physicians and nurses from Massachusetts General Hospital. “It’s for families that are in need, families that see a crisis coming or are in a crisis, and need a solution of professionals to help them out,” said Paul Dakin, superintendent of Revere schools.²⁴

There was also great success in Milwaukee, WI Public Schools in the 2009-2010 school year. In December 2009, school board members voted to allow condom distribution in their high schools. A maximum of two condoms at a time can be distributed to students after consulting with a school nurse. The start of the program was motivated by the fact that 63% of Milwaukee high school students are sexually active. Also, one-third of those students reported not using condoms during their last sexual experience, according to a 2009 survey. In addition, it was noted that Milwaukee has some of the nation’s highest rates of teen pregnancy and STIs.²⁵

Many people voiced discontent at the school board meeting, including 18-year-old student Alex Erdmann, “This is not what educators’ roles are.”²⁶Members of the Wisconsin Abstinence Coalition expressed concern over the plan and the shift away from abstinence-only programs. Many opponents also argued that access will increase rates of teen sexual activity. Supporters of the policy, however, stressed research that condom distribution does not, in fact, promote sex. Rather, “They just allow for safer sex.”²⁷

“What we're hoping for is that students who come in for these will walk away with a larger discussion about their sexual activity and, in some cases, we may find out where there are problems in their lives over and above the use of condoms,” said Terry Falk, the vice chairman of the committee.²⁸ The distribution will go into effect as early as the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year.

Of course, there are still those apprehensive of increasing access of contraceptives to students. In March 2010, controversy arose in Seattle, WA after a 15-year-old Ballard High School student was referred to get an abortion in an outside medical clinic by her school-based health center without parental consent. However, “the referral was done in accordance with state law, which gives minors the right to receive reproductive services, including abortion, without consent from parents, guardians or the baby’s father.”²⁹

The student’s mother was upset that the referral took place without her consent, even though she had previously signed a consent form for her daughter to access the school-based health care center. Her argument stemmed from the fact that, while the consent form stated that youth can access reproductive health care at any age, it did not specifically mention abortion.

County health officials are now taking measure to make the range of services available more clear to avoid similar incidences in the future. “We’re going to work constructively with our partners and experts in adolescent health to strategize the best ways to communicate that,” said T.J. Cosgrove of Seattle and King County Public Health.³⁰County and school board officials continue to support Ballard High School’s health care center in their decision to keep their referral confidential.

Contraceptive access advocates did not fare as well in Myrtle Point, OR. After several students asked guidance counselors for contraceptives, the school board took up the issue as to whether the school should distribute condoms. After a public forum, the board concluded that schools would not distribute contraceptives, including condoms.

Although the principal confirmed several pregnancies in the local high school, the majority of board and community members were appalled at the prospect of the school distributing condoms. That would give “a green light to partake in activities that should wait,” according to one teacher and baseball coach. “We are opening the door and pushing them through,” expressed another local father. One local minister even stated that distribution of condoms “would encourage statutory rape, contraceptives have a significant failure rate, and morally, regardless of religion, it is wrong.”³¹

Although there were some setbacks in the fight towards contraception access, as illustrated by Myrtle Point, Oregon, many school districts have taken proactive approaches toward decreasing teen pregnancy and STI rates via expanded contraception information and access. While it is encouraging that youth are increasingly gaining access and information to enable them to make healthy and safe decisions, it is problematic that the issue of sex education is only seen in terms of how it can reduce teen pregnancy and STI rates.

Rather than wanting youth to have a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of body image, gender, sexuality identity and expression, and relationship skills, all issues that are part of a teen’s daily life and encompassed in an ideal sex education curriculum, the basic trend is that school administrator’s and board member’s sole motivation towards making changes in their curricula remains the lowering of teen pregnancy and STI rates.

However, there were a few instances in which changes were implemented not only to reduce pregnancy rates, but to provide support options to teens. As seen in Robeson High School, the school principal’s primary concern was creating supportive and nonjudgmental environments for those who have become pregnant. He looked into options that would enable pregnant teens a way to continue their education and lives, rather than stigmatize and look down upon pregnant and parenting students as undesirable statistics.

ADVOCATES CHALLENGE

ABSTINENCE-ONLY-UNTIL-MARRIAGE PROGRAMS

In countless communities, advocates are increasingly challenging abstinence-only-until-marriage programs in favor of more comprehensive curricula. This is even occurring in states such as Texas which has traditionally been one of the most conservative states regarding sex education. As with many changes toward more comprehensive education, high teen pregnancy rates have sparked many challenges. In addition, in the 2009-2010 school year, SIECUS monitored several instances in which student advocates, discontent with their curriculum and general lack of knowledge regarding sex in their schools, successfully rallied to add comprehensive sex education materials into their classrooms.

In response to increasingly high teen pregnancy rates and studies showing that abstinence-only programs are not effective in reducing rates, parents and sex educators in Dallas, TX have begun advocating for more comprehensive sexual education in their schools. In the McKinney school district’s curriculum information night, parents were surprised and frustrated that contraception was not included in the health education curriculum. “We’ve found that most parents think their local districts are teaching more,” said Dan Quinn of the Texas Freedom Network, an Austin-based nonprofit that advocates for comprehensive sex education. “With more parents knowing what is going on, there is pressure on districts to do the right thing.”³²

Although Texas is known for having staunch abstinence-only programs, many community members and school administrators have begun to doubt their effectiveness and are considering more comprehensive options. In addition, with the Obama administration’s cuts to abstinence-only funding and increase of teen pregnancy prevention programs, which include information on contraceptives, it is predicted that “there would be little, if any, focus on abstinence-only programs going forward.”³³

“Lots of districts” are looking into alternatives, said Renee Putter, the director of athletics and the physical education and health coordinator for the Carrollton-Farmers Branch school district, such as “abstinence-plus” programs in which the curriculum warns of early sexual activity and focuses on abstinence as the best method, while also discussing more comprehensive methods of prevention.³⁴ Of course, these efforts have been challenged by organizations such as Aim for Success, the country’s largest provider of abstinence-only programs. “Kids need to know about contraceptives and that they're not foolproof,” said Marilyn Morris, who runs a Texas-based Aim for Success. “They need to realize if they use ... [contraception], they could still get pregnant and diseases.”³⁵

The Texas Education Code on sexual education is very ambiguous. It does not require that schools teach sex education, but, if they do, requires an emphasis on abstinence and to “teach contraception and condom use in terms of human use reality rates instead of theoretical laboratory rates.”³⁶ Some districts, over 2%, have opted not to include any sex education as a result.

In other districts, people are challenging authorities bringing in conservative materials and speakers to their local schools. In Henrico County, VA, teachers, parents, NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia, and the Richmond chapter of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network protested a speech by abstinence-only speaker, Pam Stenzel, at Douglas Freeman High School. They cited concerns over religious ideology, misinformation, and scare tactics that were used in the speech.

Similar controversy arose three years ago when Stenzel spoke at the same school. Dr. Wendy Klein, expert on women’s health, talked about her son’s experience with Stenzel three years prior. “He was very distressed, because he knows better,” Klein said. “He said she tried to scare everybody not to use birth-control pills.”³⁷ Klein continued, “There is nothing wrong with promoting abstinence. But, you have to be careful about scaring them away from birth control.”³⁸

High School junior Connor Hill also criticized Stenzel, “She was very biased in her attempt to inform us,” he wrote in a post online. “She pretty much bashed any students in the school who have had sex at this point and told them that they will never be able to live it down.”³⁹Teachers protested the speaker as well stating that Stenzel is not apolitical, and “that’s to be expected of a speaker in a public school,” according to Freeman teacher Michelle Gajda.⁴⁰

Additionally, Freeman parents and students pointed out the irony of students being taken out of class to watch the Stenzel presentation. A few months earlier, teachers had to personally receive parental permission for students to listen to President Obama’s beginning of the school year academic pep talk. His speech also had to be reviewed before the students were able to listen. On the other hand, while parents had the option to opt out of having their children listen to Stenzel, parents said it was unclear in the message who and how controversial the speaker was.

Advocates were also upset in Dayton, Ohio in May 2010 when Pam Stenzel was paid $8,000 to deliver four presentations in area middle and high schools. Covered under the federal Community-Based Abstinence Education grant, members of the AIDS Taskforce of Greater Cleveland asked for the speeches to be canceled because they objected to taxpayer funds being used to support “an extremist, nonscientific presenter.”⁴¹The Taskforce cited that many of Stenzel’s statements are inaccurate. For example, regarding condoms and HPV, she has stated, “Condoms, if used properly, provide no protection against herpes and HPV.”⁴²However,researchers have found that condoms offer a 70% risk reduction of contracting HPV among newly sexually active women.

Their request was deniedby Elizabeth’s New Life Center, the Dayton anti-abortion organization that sponsored the Stenzel event. SIECUS’ review of Pam Stenzel and other abstinence-only-until-marriage speakers and curricula can be found at www.siecus.org/reviews.

STUDENTS PUSH FOR MORE INFORMATION

During the 2009-2010 school year, there were many examples of students advocating for more comprehensive sex education in their schools. When no one else would offer them the information they craved and needed, students took the initiative, researching and advising each other on issues of sex education. Again, there was resistance from school administrators and parents, who argued that the students weren’t mature enough to take on these tasks or learn certain information. However, students raising their voices across the country have challenged districts to reevaluate their current sex education systems.

In Casa Grande, AZ, school board members are taking into consideration recommendations set forth by the Future Problem Solvers for reducing the rates of teen pregnancy. The Future Problem Solvers are a group of students in the Casa Grande Union High School that have won a state championship on their project entitled, “Beyond the Birds and the Bees.”⁴³ In an effort to “improve student’s access to sex education both in 2010 and beyond, so that students have medically accurate, comprehensive information to help them make responsible and informed sexual choices,”⁴⁴ members of the Future Problem Solvers conducted interviews with City Council members, parents, teachers, administrators, health professionals, and policymakers. They distributed surveys around campus and held community forums to gather public opinions about sex education. They also reviewed sex education curricula being used across Arizona.

In a work session set to discuss their plans, the students cited that Arizona has the third highest teen pregnancy rate in the nation, with 89 pregnancies for every 1,000 girls. They noted that other states with high rates, including Arizona, exclusively use abstinence-based programs. In contrast, states with the lowest rates of teen pregnancy, including Maine and Washington, use comprehensive sex education curricula.

The students made several recommendations to the school board on ways to reduce teen pregnancy rates, including to enhance the current curriculum, create a sex education resource center on campus, establish a pregnancy support group, and provide an information booth and activities during prom week. At the meeting, the students were applauded for their level of maturity in dealing with this controversial issue as well as admired for their willingness to tackle this difficult problem.

After a study performed by a Dayton High School class revealed that Lyon County, NV has the highest teen pregnancy rates in the state, a state which already has a high national average of teen pregnancy rates, school board members decided in June 2010 to create a committee to reevaluate their current abstinence only curriculum, “Worth the Wait.”⁴⁵ Earlier that year, students of another local high school who attended the district’s Student Summit requested that the district incorporates a more comprehensive sexual education curriculum. They argued that the current curriculum did not provide sufficient information on all aspects of sex education.

Trustee Theo McCormick believes a more comprehensive approach is necessary in Lyon County. “I would like to see us add something a little more fact-based that hopefully meets the needs of our students as they leave our district,” he said.⁴⁶ The motion to reinstate a committee to evaluate the current sexual education curriculum was passed unanimously in a June 2010 board meeting. SIECUS will continue to monitor the situation.

In Anchorage, AK, students urged school administrators to offer additional, and more relevant, sex education in high school. Currently, only students in the fifth, sixth, and eighth grades receive any sex education. In the fifth and sixth grade classes, the focus is on puberty. There is also brief mention of intercourse and HIV transmission. In the eighth grade class, District Health Curriculum specialist Sharon Vassiere said students learn a greater focus on relationships, sexually transmitted diseases and for the first time, contraception.⁴⁷

In Anchorage schools, instructors are able to show different forms of contraception, talk about how to use them, and show pictures of the process, but no demonstrations are allowed. Instructors may also discuss where they are available in their community. Many students have voiced interest in continuing sex education classes into high school. Student leaders say human sexuality classes in high school should cover topics like teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and abusive relationships, all of which would be more meaningful to high school students.⁴⁸

District officialsare now contemplating adding an elective sex education course available in high schools to accommodate the students’ interests and are currently drafting possible curricula.

As those in authority have continued to object to comprehensive sexuality education, parents, teachers, and students have played an impressive role in successfully advocating for the demise of abstinence-only education. In many cases, students who are well aware of the inadequacies of abstinence-only programs and the misinformation spreading around their schools, have taken the initiative to sufficiently educate their peers, giving them the knowledge necessary to make healthy and informed decisions.

While there has been great resistance towards students addressing these issues, as opponents argue that teens are not mature enough or object to the material being taught, students have persisted in fighting for their right to accessible information. SIECUS hopes that these fights and coalitions among students, parents, and teachers continue in the pursuit of comprehensive sexuality education.

TRICKLE DOWN: STATE LAWS INFLUENCE LOCAL DISTRICTS

As many state laws and guidelines concerning sexuality education have taken a more progressive stance, local districts have continually altered and adopted more comprehensive curricula to remain in line with new laws. There have been greatly varied reactions to these laws from district to district and state to state, but, despite protest and discontent from conservative parents and communities, as well as outcries from district administrators weary of losing local control to the state, districts have overwhelmingly taken the more progressive stance on sex education. While many of the school districts have yet to fully implement or alter programs to adjust to new state measures, these state laws seem to have prompted positive conversations among parents, teachers, administrators, and lawmakers alike.

In Wisconsin, the Healthy Youth Act, passed into law on February 24, 2010, requires schools that teach sex education to discuss STI prevention, as well as the benefits and side effects of contraception. In addition, the “courses also must provide medically accurate and age-appropriate information about human anatomy, pregnancy, parenting and how alcohol and drugs affect decision making.”⁴⁹Amendments to the law have also been made to mandate education on engaging in sexual activities involving a minor, and sex offender registration information. Voted against by all Republicans, citing that the new law strips local school districts of control, the Healthy Youth Act is set to take effect in all Wisconsin public schools in the 2010-2011 school year. Individual schools are allotted the right to drop all of their sexual education courses if they do not want to comply with the new law. Students will also have the option to opt out of any comprehensive sex education course.

One of the most strident reactions to the passing of the Healthy Youth Act was seen in Juneau County, WI. Juneau County District Attorney, Scott Southworth, was compelled to warn teachers of the possible repercussions of teaching more comprehensive sex education curricula. Southworth warned heath educators that they could face criminal charges for teaching students about contraception. He stated that teaching students how to use condoms or other methods of birth control would be contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a misdemeanor charge punishable by up to nine months behind bars and a $10,000 fine.

Currently in Wisconsin, youth under the age of 17 who have sex with each other can be charged as juveniles. In addition, 17-year-olds who engage in sexual activity with one another can be charged with a misdemeanor as an adult. Southworth argued that teaching students how to properly use contraceptives would be constituted as promoting sex among minors who cannot have sex legally in this state.⁵⁰ He has urged the school districts to refrain from offering sex education courses until the legislature repeals the law. This has yet to occur.

“Forcing our schools to instruct children on how to utilize contraceptives encourages our children to engage in sexual behavior, whether as a victim or an offender,” Southworth wrote in a letter to five school districts. “It is akin to teaching children about alcohol use, then instructing them on how to make mixed alcoholic drinks.” ⁵¹

Fortunately, lawmakers and district officials have not taken Southworth’s claims very seriously. “As a former health teacher I kind of just laughed at the news,” said West High School principal Pete Cernohous. “I just don’t see the merit of it at this point.” ⁵²Winnebago County District Attorney Christian Gossett also added that he will not prosecute any teachers for teaching about contraceptives. State representative Kelda Helen Roys (D-Madison) calls Southworth a zealot who is trying to scare teachers out of teaching importing lessons in combating high teen pregnancy and STI rates. UW-Madison law professor, Walter Dickey, also stated that it is unlikely that a judge would find merit in persecuting a teacher for teaching a new curriculum.⁵³

Opposition to the Healthy Youth Act also occurred in the West Allis-West Milwaukee, WI school district when Superintendent Kurt Wachholz insisted that his district will continue to offer a two-fold sex education approach, offering an abstinence-based course and an abstinence-only elective class. While legislatures who wrote the law said that the elective course would violate the new law, Wachholz stated that he received a legal opinion from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction that showed that the district could pursue their abstinence-only elective plans. On the other hand, Patrick Gasper, department spokesperson, stated that the agency has not “signed off on or approved” the district’s approach.⁵⁴

In support of the West Allis-West Milwaukee school district, state senator Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin), proposed an amendment to the Senate floor that would allow districts that offered a two-fold approach with a comprehensive sex education curriculum and an abstinence-only curriculum to have the option of choosing an abstinence-only program. This amendment was later rejected along party lines. Lazich is also upset over provisions in the law that prohibits school districts from being judgmental or biased against sexually active teens. “My colleagues and I that opposed the legislation emphasized this is a logical scenario to be judgmental. The emphatic instruction to children is that they should not be having sex, period,” she stated. Lazich, as well as district administrators, continue to fight against this new law, stating, “hopefully, this law can be repealed during the next session.”⁵⁵

InJanesville, Wisconsin, a district that taught an abstinence-based curriculum prior to the new law, school board members are still concerned about the Healthy Youth Act as an infringement of local control. One member, Bill Sodermann criticized Democratic lawmakers, who he claimed have endorsed local control, but supported this bill as well. Along with Lazich, Sodermann and other members of the school committee are opposed to provisions that would “forbid teachers from saying that it’s wrong for teens to have sex.” ⁵⁶

With the passing of this law, school board members in Beloit, WI were forced to tackle the issue of sex education yet again, after the same topic caused much controversy five years ago. In 2005, the school district board of Beloit voted on and rejected a human growth and development program, after 18 months of research by a board appointed committee. Much of the debate was focused around whether the curriculum would emphasize abstinence or if it covered more broad topics, such as homosexuality, masturbation, and abortion. With no program enacted, only limited information on sex education had been available to students through health classes.

In May 2010, a new committee in Beloit was formed to take another look at the human growth and development program, including members of clergy, medical professionals, and parents. While many are still apprehensive towards these issues, the state mandate has forced school districts to begin important conversations about implementing more comprehensive sexuality education programs. A program abiding by the new state law must be in place by the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year.

Senator Judy Robson believes that these districts will benefit from a comprehensive sex education curriculum. She stated that the purpose of the Healthy Youth Act is to prevent high rates of teen pregnancy and STIs. Also, she believes it will enable students to make more well-informed decisions and lead healthier lives. “I think it is important because we have a current epidemic.”⁵⁷

The Oregon State Department of Education asked St. Helens, OR school district in June 2010 to make additions to its current sex education program, which is taught to seventh and eighth graders, “I’m In Charge of the FACTS,” to include more information on safe sex practices. The state agency stated that FACTS violates state law as it does not provide adequate information about contraceptives.⁵⁸

School leaders in the district are wary of adding more comprehensive information, citing concern over sensitive families in the district who may become upset over the additional information. Lisa Rawlings, Columbia City Elementary School principal, expressed that some material reviewed seemed too “urban” for St. Helens and that, “some more conservative families might not want to share any information about contraceptives. And that’s fine.”⁵⁹Regardless of concern, however, amendments must be made to the current FACTS curriculum to include accurate information on contraceptives, as required by Oregon state law.

The Oregon State Board of Education has provided Northwest Family Services, the publisher of “I’m in Charge of the FACTS,” with various materials to be used as additions to comply with state law. No permanent changes have yet to be decided, but it is expected that there will be “support for the proposed curriculum once it is rewritten to incorporate the state requirements.”⁶⁰

Some districts have embraced changes mandated by state governments requiring more comprehensive sex education. In Gaston County, NC school district, superintendent Reeves McGlohan held information sessions at local churches discussing how the school would implement the new sex education curriculum, required to be in place by the 2010-2011 school year. Attended by dozens of community and clergy members, McGlohan stated that the school system will do what the law has required, even though some provisions leave themselves open to interpretation. McGlohan stated that in addition to the mandated information on contraception and STI prevention, students in his district will also receive information on sexual abuse and assault.⁶¹

These changes were sparked by the passing of the Healthy Youth Act in North Carolina. Signed into law on June 30, 2009, the Healthy Youth Act will require students to receive the existing abstinence-only-until-marriage program, followed by additional comprehensive information about contraception and disease prevention. This is required of all students grades seven through nine. The law requires that both curricula teach objective information “based upon scientific research that has been peer reviewed and accepted by professionals and credentialed experts in the field of sexual health.”⁶²

According to the ACLU, the North Carolina Healthy Youth Act, distinct from the law of the same name passed in Wisconsin, does not require “the info be medically accurate or that schools do away with curricula that includes gender bias or discrimination against LGBTQ students or families.”⁶³

Therefore, while it is a step forward to mandate additional comprehensive sex education information, the foundation of the abstinence-only-until-marriage programs may be medically inaccurate, using skewed success rates of various forms of contraceptive to scare the students into not using any form of protection. Again, parents have the choice to opt their children out of any part of the sex education curriculum, both the abstinence-only-until-marriage and the comprehensive portions. Also, school leaders have the ultimate decision as to how extensive each lesson is.

North Carolinians overwhelmingly supported the passing of this law. One survey indicated that nearly 70% of North Carolinian voters supported the original, more progressive draft of the bill, which would have allowed parents to choose either an abstinence-only-until-marriage or a comprehensive program. Even a majority of conservatives and Republicans supported this original draft, with 58% and 54% in support, respectively.⁶⁴

Gaston County’s high teen pregnancy rate has also triggered local faith communities to help in the efforts to reduce these rates, including the Gastonia Faith Network, the Gaston County Clergy, and Citizen Coalition. Local faith leaders have held sex education classes available to teens.⁶⁵ “What I think are the primary players in reducing teen pregnancy are the family, the church and the schools. This is a real teeing off to making a significant reduction in teen pregnancy in our county,” said Gastonia Faith Network facilitator Bill Seabrook.⁶⁶ It is unclear as to what the sex education classes held in local churches encompass.

Positive news has also come out of Bend-La Pine, OR schools, where school board members are updating their sex education policies for the sixth grade curriculum. Prior to passing a more comprehensive law, sixth graders were taught from the STARS (Students Today Aren’t Ready for Sex) program, which did not fit the new criteria’s comprehensive requirements.

While Oregon was already one of the few states that required comprehensive sex education, having made it mandatory in the late 1980s, a new law passed in 2009 now outlines more explicitly the requirement of medically accurate information and to provide more information on contraception and risks of STDs. It requires all public elementary and secondary schools to provide “age-appropriate human sexuality education” as an “integral part of the health education curriculum.”⁶⁷ In addition, the law “mandates that schools promote abstinence, for school-age youth, and mutually monogamous relationships with an uninfected partner, for adults, as the most effective way to prevent pregnancy and the transmission of STDs.”⁶⁸

The STARS program was replaced with My Future, My Choice, a program which stresses abstinence-only-until-marriage practices, but with its primary focus being building resistance skills of all peer pressures (sex, drugs, alcohol, etc.). My Future, My Choice only skims areas of teen pregnancy and contraceptives. “In essence this really introduces the fact that besides abstinence, there are other methods of protection,” said Bill Rhoades, Bend-La Pine Schools’ chief academic officer for middle school education.⁶⁹Like the STARS program, trained peer student leaders will conduct the first five out of ten lessons, with topics ranging from peer and social pressures, the advantages of postponing sex, techniques that help students resist the pressure to have sex, stages of puberty, the risks of sexual activity, and methods of protection like abstinence and contraception.

While there has been push back by local districts against state laws requiring more comprehensive sex education and barring abstinence-only programs, the new mandates have sent a message to communities that more information is the best and most necessary option. Bills similar to Wisconsin’s Healthy Youth Act being implemented in states across the country have forced districts to reevaluate current curricula and institute new programs that comply with state guidelines. Although much of the language in these laws are ambiguous, and local districts are using that to their advantage to continue their abstinence-only programming, these laws have institutionally legitimized comprehensive sex education.

THE FIGHT’S NOT OVER:

SEXUALITY EDUCATION FACES STRONG OPPOSITION

Despite the general positive trend towards more comprehensive sex education, there are still many places and individuals who are staunchly opposed to any lessons that are not exclusively abstinence only. Many opponents are ideologically opposed, arguing that sex education should not be taught in the classroom, but by parents based upon their individual child’s curiosity and maturity level. Others object to more comprehensive programming arguing that they go too far and claiming psychosocial disturbances of their children as a result. SIECUS believes that as comprehensive sex programs are moving forward, it is important to further educate and train parents as well as students. This would allow for community members to voice their discomfort around talking about sexuality, as well as create an open dialogue on finding a balance for those who stand ideologically opposed.

Controversy erupted in Columbus, OH, when the Franklin County Board of Commissioners voted to give Planned Parenthood of Central Ohio a $50,000 grant to teach sex education classes in 19 district middle and high schools. Teens would have access to medical exams and will be provided information on pregnancy and STI prevention.⁷⁰Michael Gonidakis, executive director of Ohio Right to Life, warned of the potential harm that could be done if children are taught by Planned Parenthood representatives. “My daughter is not yet 3, but I certainly don't want her learning from the nation's largest provider of abortion about how to use condoms at age 12. It shocks the conscience.”⁷¹

Although the grant does not fund anything related to abortion, Ohio Right to Life says even the involvement of Planned Parenthood crosses the line. Lisa Perks, chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood of Central Ohio, reassured community members that, “No taxpayer dollars will be used for abortions. This money is to prevent the need for abortions.”⁷² Opponents also contend the sex education should focus on abstinence and should be taught by parents.⁷³

Commissioner Marilyn Brown has defended the decision, citing that abstinence-only programs have been proven ineffective and that parents often do not talk about sex to their children. Although the county has had a contract with Planned Parenthood since 2003, this was the first incidence where there was great public objection. “It's unfortunate that the prevention of very debilitating diseases among our teenagers is becoming a controversy,” Brown said.⁷⁴

Parents in Middletown, CT met with school administrators in December 2009 after becoming upset over materials they found inappropriate that were covered in a ninth grade sex education presentation.

The presentation, given by Wesleyan University students, showed students slang terms for various sexual acts on a Powerpoint presentation. In groups of both males and female, students were asked to organize slang terms for sexual acts into either, “Oh yeah, baby” or “Nah, not for me,” to show their preferences.⁷⁵ Parents were also upset that students were asked to role play what they would say before, during, and after sex with each other. “They basically took her innocence away,” said one parent of his 14-year-old daughter.⁷⁶

On the other hand, Athletic Director Michael Pitruzzello, said only a few parents complained and the Wesleyan students had given the same presentation in other districts with little to no complaint. “No matter what we do, we always have people concerned about their son or daughter being taught wellness,” he said.⁷⁷

Associate Superintendent for Teaching and Learning, Barbara Senges, said staff reviewed the material used in the presentation after the complaints. “Given some of the input we got from the parents, which we took very seriously, if we were to do the presentation again, we would change (it),” she said.⁷⁸ In the future, parents will be notified of the presentation and will have the choice to opt their child out of the lesson.

In Staten Island, NY, a teacher who was suspended for allowing students to use non-technical terms for body parts and sex acts in February 2008 won her first battle in court. After teaching the state mandated HIV/AIDS prevention lesson, Faith Kramer, a 26-year veteran health and physical education teacher with no disciplinary record, was issued a letter stating she was being charged with “corporal punishment” and was sent to the administrative detention center where she continued to receive her salary.⁷⁹

In her lesson plan, she provided her eighth grade students with the technical terms for sexual organs, sexual acts and bodily fluids, and later asked her students to list any other terms they might know for those things. When some parents saw “vulgar” terminology in their child’s notebook, they notified the school principal.

In a city investigation, it was found that Kramer had violated a regulation that prohibited verbal abuse, or discipline “by use of language that tends to cause fear, physical or mental distress.”⁸⁰No formal charges were brought to Kramer and she returned to work in September 2009. However, in March 2010, she filed a federal suit against the city seeking $1 million in damages for mental anguish, lawyer’s fees, and the loss of extra after-school work.

Kramer first appeared in federal court in May 2010, where the judge overruled a city effort to dismiss her case. The judge also ruled that she appeared to be following the spirit of a state syllabus that encouraged students to use sexual terms that they understood, so that they could relate those words to the more formal terminology. “If students use different terms,” the syllabus says, “make sure they understand the relationship between both sets of terms.”⁸¹

In addition, the judge ruled that the city violated the due process clause of the 14th Amendment by not providing Ms. Kramer with a reasonable opportunity to know that her lesson plan was inappropriate before removing her from the classroom. Neither the corporal punishment nor the verbal abuse regulations were properly applied, because she was trying to teach, not punish students, Judge Jack Weinstein wrote.⁸² Now, Kramer is waiting for a financial settlement to be reached with city lawyers.

Efforts by students to further educate themselves and their peers have also been trumped by conservative parents. After a group of students in Hillsboro High School’s leadership class in Nashville, TN found a pregnancy test in the bathroom, they decided to be trained as peer educators for their service learning project. Their goal was to reduce the number of pregnancies and help students make better decisions about sex and relationships. They enlisted the help of Nashville CARES, a nonprofit that provides AIDS prevention and other information regarding sex education, to train them.

In an eight-hour leadership class, students were taught sexual anatomy, sexual practices, and abstinence, as well as safer sex practices. Because the material was considered explicit, a two-page parental consent form had to be signed for student participation, according to Joe Interrante, chief executive officer at Nashville CARES.⁸³ However, one training session caused quite a stir in the school district.

To help demonstrate how barrier contraceptive methods work to a student who was having a difficult time, a CARES staff member put a condom on a plastic model of male genitalia. They also discussed the prostate’s role in male sexual response and offered free HIV testing to students. One Nashville father, Rodrick Glover, learned this through his daughter in the leadership class. He said his daughter’s “innocence had been stolen,” as a result of the presentation. “She thought it was pornography,” he added.⁸⁴

Tennessee law prohibits contraceptive methods to be brought into the class room or distributed, even by guest speakers.⁸⁵However, studentsover the age of 13 do not need parental consent to receive HIV testing. As a result,the teacher in charge of the leadership class, Susanne Frensley, the 2007 Tennessee teacher of the year, was reprimanded and the training was put on hold until further discussion.

Outside of a school board meeting to discuss whether the program would be able to continue legally under the district’s policy, fights ensued between supporters and opponents of the sex education training. Police had to separate the two groups before tensions mounted. Glover was the only person who spoke against the session, while two students, two parents, and the CEO of Nashville CARES defended it. The school board decided that Metro Nashville Public Schools would discontinue the class but would not discontinue its partnership with Nashville CARES for its regular sex education program. However, the group of students in the leadership class continued to receive the training by Nashville CARES outside of the school grounds.

In Gainesville, FL, parents objected to a comprehensive sex education curriculum that had been proposed for elementary students. Approved by the school district’s Sex and AIDS Review Committee in Spring 2009, the Family Life and Sexual Health (F.L.A.S.H.) curriculum caused controversy even before it was to be implemented in the 2010-2011 school year.

F.L.A.S.H. was introduced in Gainesville middle and high school in the 2009-2010 school year and was set to be taught in elementary schools as well. It teaches students human development and reproduction, sexually transmitted diseases, self-respect, making good decisions, and what constitutes sexual exploitation. Currently, elementary schools have a Good Touch/Bad Touch program in place to teach children about molestation and inappropriate touching.

After reviewing the curriculum, several parents and some school board members called some diagrams in the lessons too graphic and objected to other content regarding “stimulation.”⁸⁶Some suggest that students could be divided into lower- and upper-age groups to ensure age appropriateness. “My concern with any attempt in this subject matter is the appropriate understanding by all elementary students recognizing, of course, that they have vast differences in their ability to understand between first-graders and fifth-graders,” said Sammy Smith, school board member, “... Hopefully a fresh look can be done with a bit more sensitivity to elementary students.”⁸⁷ The Sex and AIDS Review committee is now reevaluating the program, taking suggestions from community members.

These controversies make it quite apparent that while there has been a shift towards comprehensive sex education, with increased federal funding and new state mandates, these changes have not come undisputed. In general, it is parents or other conservative community members, not students, who protest more comprehensive changes. It is clear that more information is wanted and needed by students, making it necessary for opponents to put their personal beliefs aside, allowing for more accessible information.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER EXPRESSION

STILL CONTROVERSIAL IN MANY PLACES

Despite great strides towards more accepting and tolerant school and community climates, discussions based around sexual orientation and gender expression are still controversial in many communities. Any discussion merely acknowledging the existence of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) people with young children is taboo in some communities. However, in the face of conservative districts and community members that fail to address these issues, many brave student activists continue to be willing to expose themselves and stand up for their rights.

At the end of the 2009-2010 school year in Helena, MT, controversy arose after some parents became upset over new elementary school guidelines that address same gender families. The new guidelines also have lessons on how to fight homophobia. The plan to implement a new health education curriculum began over two years ago in 2008. During the 2009-2010 school year, a health enhancement curriculum committee met monthly to draft a curriculum that is age appropriate and informative. In a board meeting in mid-July 2010, public comment was first accepted. More than 300 parents attended and another 200 waited in the parking lot to voice their opinions.

In one editorial written in June, parents Rick and Kathy DeMarinis outlined various reasons why they and several other parents oppose the new guidelines. First, they stated that the material is not age-appropriate. Second, they believe that the classroom is being used to push a political agenda of a small population of residents. “The classroom should not be used as a vehicle for fostering acceptance and tolerance of moral behavior or lifestyles many parents oppose,” they stated.⁸⁸They contend that lessons on homosexualrelationships, abortion, and the use of erotic art as education for high schoolers sexualizes children.

In addition, some parents argued that the curriculum is not in line with the mission statements issued by the district’s board of trustees. They believe these guidelines do not “foster an educational experience that is dynamic, relevant and meaningful, and it doesn’t contribute to an environment that is emotionally safe.”⁸⁹Also, they believe teachers shouldnot use class time to discuss issues that many parents oppose. Teaching sex education in schools undermines the roles of parents, they argued, as the teaching of sex education is primarily the role of parents, not of the school. Finally, as seen in many protests before, opponents discuss the loss of innocence of their children.

Supporters say the proposed health education curriculum contains honest, science-based information on wellness and allows students to make better decisions.⁹⁰Regarding outcries from opposition that say that much of the material is not age-appropriate, Superintendent Bruce Messinger noted that their guidelines are consistent with the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics.⁹¹

Gay and lesbian residents and parents gave testimonials of their own experiences of being harassed as openly gay or lesbian students. They were shoved into lockers, threatened, and called homophobic slurs. They praised the anti-homophobic curricula stating, “had there been some sort of tolerance in the schools none of that would have happened.”⁹²

Melanie Reynolds, MPH Health Officer for Lewis and Clark County, noted that abstinence-only curricula have been proven ineffective and with the county’s 40% Chlamydia rate among teens aged 14-18, a comprehensive sex education curriculum is the best, and necessary, choice.⁹³

With the community as passionately divided as it is, Trustee Terry Beaver believes that the committee needs to look at the sexuality sections separately and to take a further look at them. Public comment will be accepted for a final time on August 10, 2010, when the final decision of implementation will be decided.

There were also heated disputes in Oak Park, IL, a community known for being socially progressive and tolerant. In an effort to prevent anti-gay slurs in the classroom, district elementary schools implemented anti-bullying lessons focusing on homophobia.

The school’s improvement team brought in Shannon Sullivan, executive director of the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance, to conduct training sessions with teachers and staff and to talk with parents at a Parent-Teacher Organization (PTO) meeting about the importance of these trainings. The objectives of these trainings were “to educate on the effects of homophobia and heterosexism, to provide tools to school personnel ... affected by homophobia and heterosexism.”⁹⁴ This initiative soon lead to a battle among parents about whether same sex relationships should be discussed with children as early as kindergarten. The Illinois Family Institute initiated the opposition, publishing an angry piece on their website and beginning an email blitz to the school’s administrators.⁹⁵

Laurie Higgins, of the Family Institute, stated that while there is a large gay population in Oak Park and she wants to end discrimination, “it's not appropriate to undermine the moral conviction of conservative parents and use taxpayers' resources for this.”⁹⁶

“It’s inappropriate, and it’s not (the school’s) place to tell our children what is morally right or wrong on this controversial topic,” reiterated parent Margaret Brown.⁹⁷ She and other conservative parents agreed that no one should be bullied, but also agreed that the words gay, lesbian, or homosexual should not be introduced to children in the elementary level. A letter read at a PTO meeting discussing the moral disapproval of gay families sent a gay high school student crying out of the room and other community members, gay and straight alike, surprised and disturbed.

“I'm heterosexual, but I feel personally attacked,” said Kathy Stohr, a resident parent. “We're being attacked for being a welcoming school.”⁹⁸ Principal Jonathan Ellwanger has stood by the decision to implement these lessons, as they are part of broader lack of sensitivity that the school decided to address. Many parents also agree on the importance of creating open dialogues on these issues, as they are new territory and elicit strong reactions.

In Park Ridge, IL, one lesbian student pushed for her high school to have more harsh punishments for those who engaged in harassment based on sexual orientation. She also advocated for sensitivity trainings for teachers and administrators to better deal with harassment as well as more comprehensive sexuality education.

Anna Rangos, a junior at Maine South High School, told her story of endless harassment at a school board meeting in May 2010. Peers attacked her in class, calling her disgusting and unnatural after a school newspaper article she wrote about transgender issues was published. She hears homophobic slurs in the school hallways on a regular basis. Rangos was even compelled to skip school for several days because of the ongoing, severe harassment. “My self-esteem just totally dropped because of what was being said. Every single year, there’s an incident, and I’ve never seen a kid punished,” she said.⁹⁹ Rangos believes teachers could do much more to educate students about sexuality and to punish sexual harassment in school.

Despite these stories of endless harassment, Superintendent Ken Wallace believes that the school doesn’t have to make many changes regarding their sexual harassment policies and training. “We’ve actually got, we believe, pretty good programs in place,” Wallace said. “There’s a Gay Straight Alliance in all the buildings, and we work within the schools to make sure there is awareness and sensitivity. We’re trying to make sure everyone feels safe and comfortable and isn’t bullied.”¹⁰⁰

Rangos acknowledged the existence of the GSA in her school, but noted that many LGBTQ students shy away from participation because of social stigma. Also, Rangos pointed out the backward standards and punishments in her school. She has only seen one student disciplined for using a derogatory term, but said students get up to four hours of Saturday detention for using cell phones during school time.

No changes have been made yet, but Rangos, with the help of organizations such as the Illinois Safe School Alliance, continue to push for more accepting and welcoming school climates with fair punishments.

Students in Kirkwood, MO successfully petitioned their high school to add sexual orientation to their anti-harassment policy in May 2010. Before their efforts, the policy covered discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender, national orientation, ancestry, and disability or age, but left out sexual orientation. Board members stated they left out sexual orientation as it is not mentioned in federal discrimination policies. Sexual orientation is now included in the district’s harassment policy, which refers to specific cases, as opposed to broad cases of discrimination.

Beginning in March 2010, when students of Kirkwood High School’s student newspaper and Gay Straight Alliance attended a board meeting to showcase their request, their movement soon gained momentum, with mass support on Facebook and help from St. Louis's gay rights advocacy group “Show Me No Hate.” Students collected nearly 1,000 signatures in support of adding sexual orientation to the harassment policy. They believed that, in the long run, change in policy will change views and overall climate in the school.

“You can’t end discrimination with two words, but you can really show we will not stand for this,” said senior Andy Gaglio, the co-president of the Gay Straight Alliance. “Those two words, on paper, fortified in our policy, would be huge in trying to get rid of the ignorance, and the bigotry, and the hate that exists.”¹⁰¹

Current and former students gave testimonies of their horrifying experiences of sexual harassment in Kirkwood High School. “Once word got out that I am a lesbian, I would walk down a hall, any hall, and it would part like the Red Sea, like I was contagious,” said one former student.¹⁰²

“The more loud and proud I was, the more I embraced who I was, the more ridicule there was,” added another former student.¹⁰³

Even students who had not been direct targets of sexual discrimination or harassment felt compelled to stand up for this cause. “People say this is not my fight because I’m not gay, but it is our fight. I care because people I care about are suffering,” said Kirkwood High senior Ryan Schuessler. Students also noted that often times, faculty members were aware of these happenings and did little to nothing to prevent or to stop them. If sexual orientation were added to the policy, students and faculty would be more vigilant and it wouldn’t “allow a staff member to turn a blind eye.”¹⁰⁴ In mid May 2010, the school board voted unanimously to add sexual orientation to the district’s harassment policy.

A controversy that garnered much national attention occurred in Itawamba County, MS.
In early March, Itawamba County school district decided to cancel their high school prom after 18-year-old lesbian student, Constance McMillan asked that she be allowed to bring her girlfriend to the prom and to wear a tuxedo. The student first approached school officials with her request in December 2009, and again in February 2010, just before the school circulated a memo to students outlining prom rules that included a gender-based dress code and a rule prohibiting same-sex couples.¹⁰⁵ Although same-sex prom dates had been banned from the prom in the past, the student hoped the school would honor her First Amendment rights by reconsidering its policy.

When her school told her that she was not allowed to wear a tuxedo or bring a same-sex date, McMillan contacted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) which demanded the school change its policy of only allowing heterosexual couples attend prom. In response, the school district cancelled the prom, “due to the distractions to the educational process caused by recent events.”¹⁰⁶

In response to the school district’s decision to cancel the prom, the ACLU filed a lawsuit in federal court against the district on behalf of the student. The lawsuit sought a court order for the school to hold the prom; it also requested that the student be allowed to escort her girlfriend, a fellow student, and to wear a tuxedo. The school held to their claim that both requests violated policy.¹⁰⁷

With disappointment and blame spreading fast at Itawamba Agricultural High School, a parent-sponsored prom was arranged, to be held off school grounds, at the end of March. Following the trial, the federal judge ruled that the school district’s actions violated the student’s constitutional rights, but the judge did not move to reinstate the prom because it was understood that the student would be invited to a prom being held by parents of her Itawamba classmates.¹⁰⁸ The judge wrote that “requiring defendants to step back into a sponsorship [on such short notice] would only confuse and confound the community on the issue.”¹⁰⁹ He said he would hold a trial on the matter later.¹¹⁰

After the judge’s ruling was announced, a group of about 80 Itawamba parents met to discuss the original parent-sponsored prom which, prior to the trial, had intended to uphold the school’s policy against same-sex dates as well as enforcing the school’s gender-based dress code. After the meeting, a number of parents confirmed that the prom had been canceled, but would not say why.¹¹¹ Shortly following the news of the second prom’s cancellation, the school district’s attorney released a statement that the prom would be held at a slightly later date in early April, at a separate location.¹¹² This time, same-sex couples would be permitted, and students could wear what they wanted.¹¹³

When the student advocate arrived at the privately sponsored prom with her girlfriend, only five other students, including two students with learning disabilities, were in attendance. It was later confirmed that most of her other classmates from Itawamba Agricultural High School reportedly attended a separate, private prom that these students were not invited to.¹¹⁴

In the next steps of the effort to hold Itawamba Agricultural High School accountable for violating the lesbian student’s rights, the legal director for the Mississippi branch of the ACLU said, “We’re still trying to get more information.” At the very least, the low attendance at the dance “will be brought to the court’s attention.”¹¹⁵

In July 2010, school officials agreed to implement a policy banning discrimination or harassment on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, the first policy to do so at a public school in the state of Mississippi. The school also agreed to pay McMillen $35,000 in damages and pay for McMillen's attorney’s fees.¹¹⁶

GAY STRAIGHT ALLIANCES SUPPORTED

BY LAW, BUT CONTEND WITH OPPOSITION

In another positive trend, there were markedly fewer controversies surrounding Gay Straight Alliances (GSAs) in high schools this year. However, youth in certain conservative communities must still fight for more tolerant school climates and structural legitimacy of their sexual orientations.

In the Fall of 2009, a group of students in St. George, UT launched an effort to implement GSAs in every high school in Washington County School District. Initially, the students’ applications were denied or clubs were forced to comply with onerous requirements, such as getting unanimous approval of a student executive council, securing a majority vote by the school's faculty, and that clubs promote activities that are “moral” or “wholesome.”¹¹⁷ Students soon contacted the ACLU of Utah for assistance.

Alerted by the ACLU, the Washington County School District required all the high schools to adopt its content-neutral application, which seeks only the approval of a school principal. The district said it required the change because some school policies could have been interpreted to violate the First Amendment. With new policies in place, students were allowed to successfully complete applications to create the GSAs. Starting in fall 2010, students in Desert Hills, Dixie, Pine View, and Snow Canyon high schools will be able to participate in their school’s GSAs.

This news uplifted many students in the Washington County School District. Jason Osmanski, a Snow Canyon sophomore, said that the success was the “most amazing experience” of his life.¹¹⁸

Following the lead of students in St. George, students in Tooele, UT applied to implement a GSA in their high school. The request prompted the Tooele County School District to review its policies on student clubs and decide whether to allow a GSA. After contacting Carol Lear, attorney for the Utah State Office of Education, Superintendent Terry Linares learned that formation of such clubs is legal, but the name must give no indication of sexual orientation. “Some other name like ‘diversity club’ would be all right, I was told,” said Linares.¹¹⁹

The ACLU of Utah was notified and informed Linares that name restriction is not legal. Like in St. George, the ACLU worked with the Tooele School District to update its policies regarding student clubs to make sure they did not violate any first amendment rights. When the district gets information back from the ACLU, as well as from the state Office of Education, Linares said she will recommend the formation of a committee that will include broad representation from the community to review the information and make recommendations.¹²⁰

As these incidences show, homophobia and anti-homophobic harassment is still rampant in this country. Even with the continuous emergence of Gay Straight Alliances in high schools across the country, sensitivity and anti-bullying trainings, as well as numerous other support options for LGBTQ youth, many still face constant harassment in their schools and communities. More upsetting is that these occurrences often happen in front of teacher or other authority figures, with little to no repercussions to the perpetrator.

PARENTS AND SCHOOLS ATTEMPTING TO CENSOR MATERIALS

In the 2009-2010 school year, there were several incidences of parents and schools attempting to censor student materials or productions. These materials were questioned because of sex and sexuality-related themes. Also, censorship fell heavily on LGBTQ people, messages, and materials.

In Shiawassee County, Missouri, administrators in Corunna High School removed a diversity club poster board after receiving several parental complaints. The board was in honor and awareness of gay history month. It featured two gay flags, a banner stating Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Awareness Month, and pictures of nine prominent figures in the LGBTQ community. According to members of the board, LGBTQ issues should be discussed in a human sexuality or diversity class, a more educational setting. President of the Corunna School Board, Maureen Stanley, warned that, otherwise, “The display case may confuse other kids… High school kids are very impressionable.”¹²¹

Soon after being contacted by the American Civil Liberties Union, the district rescinded their decision to take down the diversity club’s poster board. “We have violated the First Amendment rights of the students and the Diversity Club,” Stanley said. “We limited their expression.”¹²²While some applauded Corunna school officials for acknowledging and apologizing for violating First Amendment rights of the club and its participants, others warn of the mixed messages of heckler’s vetoes and viewpoint discrimination.

“It’s inherently chilling to the LGBT community,” Frank Ravitch, First Amendment scholar at University of Michigan law school, said. “But creates even bigger issues by chilling dissenting viewpoints. It says, ‘we’re going to give into complaints.”¹²³

Controversy over LGBTQ rights also arose in Copiah County, Mississippi, when school administrators refused to allow a lesbian to wear a tuxedo in her senior portrait. Ceara Sturgis, a 17-year-old honor student, trumpet player, and soccer goalie, was denied freedom of gender expression when her photo and name were excluded from the senior section of her high school yearbook. Sturgis has been openly gay and worn men’s clothing, with the support of her classmates and mother, throughout her successful high school career.

Superintendent Ricky Clopton said the school district's attorney has assured him they are within their rights to exclude the photo, as only males are allowed to wear tuxedos and women are required to wear scoop neck drapes in their senior photos.¹²⁴

However, Kristy Bennett, legal director of the Mississippi chapter of the ACLU, warned the district that they are violating Sturgis’s constitutionally protected freedom of expression.¹²⁵“I feel like I'm not important, that the school is dismissing who I am as a gay student and that they don't even care about me. All I want is to be able to be me, and to be included in the yearbook,” Sturgis said.¹²⁶

Despite protest, Sturgis’s picture and name were not included in the senior section of the yearbook. A picture of her in a tuxedo, however, did appear in the yearbook in a section purchased by her family, as well as a baby photo and other pictures indicating her involvement in various school activities. Still, many community members are stunned and disappointed that not even her name with a blank picture was included. “I don't get it. Ceara is a top student. Why would they do this to her?” her mother, Veronica Rodriguez stated.¹²⁷

Parents continued to object to LGBTQ material in schools in Henderson, NV. In October, dozens of parents sought a lawyer to eliminate the plays “Rent,” which deals with artists coping with drug abuse and AIDS, and “The Laramie Project,” which is about the reaction of the 1998 murder of gay college student, Matthew Shepard, from the Green Valley High School theater.¹²⁸

The theater’s season theme, “Controversy, Compassion, Courage,” has certainly raised controversy as parents argued that since they object to the adult material and themes of homosexuality and social tolerance, their children are excluded from participation. In addition, they argued that school regulations prohibit R rated materials from being shown to students, and parents should have a say as to whether the content of the plays is appropriate.

Michael Rodriguez, a District spokesman, stated that the parents are confusing the school’s policy on movies with the school play policy. Participation in plays requires parental permission and is completely voluntary, whereas movies are sometimes compulsory parts of a curriculum. School officials and students have also noted that the plays have been toned down for a younger audience. “This is what people don’t get. It’s the high school edition,” said Joshua Lovell, a 16-year-old actor in “Rent.”¹²⁹There are very limited displays of affection and no illicit drug use in these editions.

Another student actress explained that “Rent” demonstrates the hardships of the characters rather than glamorize drug use or sexuality. Green Valley Principal, Jeff Horn, also supported the plays, citing that the school has previously performed controversial plays such as “Romeo and Juliet,” which deals with teen suicide and betrayal of family.

Fortunately, parents’ cries of exclusion and inappropriate content to halt the productions were denied in court. The judge was not convinced that the plaintiffs would face “irreplaceable harm,” one of the basic criteria of the preliminary injunction.¹³⁰To further support the productionof these plays, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada filed a court brief supporting the district with constitutional arguments for free speech.

In May 2010, books written by and celebrating LGBTQ youth were put under scrutiny by members of Glenn Beck’s watchdog organization, the 9.12 Project.

Beginning in March of 2010, a group of 18 residents attended a Burlington County, New Jersey school board meeting in attempt to have three books banned from the high school library: Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology; Love and Sex: 10 Stories of Truth; and The Full Spectrum: A New Generation of Writing About Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, and Other Identities. Only Revolutionary Voices, a collection of stories, poems and artwork by queer youth, was successfully banned, on the basis of obscenity.¹³¹

These books were targeted after well known 9.12 activist, Beverly Marinelli, found the books on the recommended book list by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. They are also attempting to ban the books in other nearby school districts as well. She calls the books “pervasively vulgar, obscene, and inappropriate” while denying having any bias against LGBTQ people.¹³²

This has caused much controversy within the Burlington County community as books cannot be legally banned on social or political grounds. “It would be convenient if we could look at these books and simply discuss whether or not they are obscene. However, we cannot overlook that the motivation behind the request to remove these titles has other social and political implications,” said Dee Venuto, head librarian at the Mount Holly high school.¹³³

A coalition of free speech groups have protested the banning of this book as well. Members of the National Coalition Against Censorship, the National Council of Teachers of English, American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the Association of American Publishers, and PEN America wrote a letter to the school board stating, “Removing any of these titles would send a clear message to those students that they are the objects of social disapproval – different, vulnerable, and marginal – whose needs for information of particular relevance to their lives are not respected.”¹³⁴

In addition, Lambda Legal, a U.S. civil rights group representing gays, lesbians, and people with HIV/AIDS, has also written to the school board saying that removing the book “undermines the school’s obligation and ability to protect students regardless of sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity”.¹³⁵

In more good news for free speech advocates, the school district in Fallbrook, CA, finally settled a censorship court case after a two-year-long battle. Beginning in 2007, issues arose when two student articles in the Fallbrook High’s newspaper, The Tomahawk, were censored. One article dealt with the school board’s buyout of former Superintendent Tom Anthony’s contract. Fallbrook High Principal stated that he was concerned over the inaccuracies of the article. The other was an editorial piece that criticized sex education that focuses solely on abstinence. Administrators stated that the adult language used led them to believe that the article was not written by a student. In addition to the censorship of the articles, the paper’s advisor was removed and the journalism class was canceled.

Students and the school paper advisor, David Evans, believed that the censorship was not warranted. According to California law, “Students of the public schools shall have the right to exercise freedom of speech and of the press … except that expression shall be prohibited which is obscene, libelous or slanderous.”¹³⁶ As a result, a lawsuit was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego and Imperial Counties and attorneys acting on behalf of the Student Press Law Center.

The terms of the settlement include letters to the student journalists who have since graduated praising them as “student leaders” who had worked to protect their “rights under the law” and had “operated within the guidelines provided by the adviser and the school.”¹³⁷ Also, the ACLU and lawyers working with the Student Press Law Center will receive a total of $20,000, and the newspaper advisor will receive $7,500.

In addition, new guidelines regarding possibly controversial material in student newspapers were implemented. First, the principal must review all content at least three days prior to publication. If the law is clearly violated, the articles will be forbidden. However, articles can still be published even if the principal “has concerns about the content of the articles as it relates to the application of Education Code 48907 or the invasion of legally protected privacy or confidentiality rights.” If the students choose to publish disputed material, they also must print a district statement that explains the administrators’ concerns with the article.¹³⁸

Frank LaMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center discussed the possible ripple effects that could be sent across the country as a result of this lawsuit. “The settlement is still very new, but I guarantee you we will be citing this settlement as a cautionary tale to other school districts about the consequences of overreaching.”¹³⁹

In one of the more offensive attempts of book censorship, the Menifee United School District, CA pulled all copies of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary from its fourth and fifth grade classrooms after an Oak Meadows Elementary School parent complained about a child stumbling across definitions for oral sex.¹⁴⁰The college-level dictionaries were initially put in the classrooms a few years ago, based on a recommended reading list from the district, in an effort to accommodate the school’s higher-level readers.

The decision raised concerns from First Amendment experts and parents, as the ban was made without the consultation of the school board. Peter Sheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition said that the removal of the dictionaries, “certainly offends free-speech principles and values that all public schools should hold dear.”¹⁴¹On the other hand, parents and community members praised the decision on the grounds that a collegiate-level dictionary is inappropriate for elementary-aged children.

Soon after the ban, a committee was made to review whether the dictionaries would be permanently banned. The committee was set to determine the extent to which the challenged material supports curriculum, the educational appropriateness of the material and its suitability to the age level of the students. In less than a week after the committee was created, the ban was lifted. Parents, however, may still opt to have their children use an alternative, more elementary dictionary.

Although most of the efforts to censor were successfully halted, it is troubling that some parents continue to treat all sexual information as dangerous to young people. As many censorship opponents have argued, the premise that knowledge and access to potentially controversial information harms ‘young, impressionable’ minds is antithetical to the mission of public schools. Youth should be free to develop critical thinking skills in a complex world full of contradictory messages. Not all materials are developmentally appropriate for all ages, but a reasoned, community-level dialogue is far better than a wholesale effort to remove or restrict materials simply because they include sexual information.

CONCLUSION

The 2009-2010 school year affirmed an encouraging trend in favor of comprehensive sex education. While the majority of the changes were sparked by fears of higher teen pregnancy and STI rates, such public health data prompted communities to question the effectiveness of abstinence-only programs and to open dialogue on controversial issues. Thanks to state laws requiring medically accurate and evidence-based sex education programs, and new federal funding for comprehensive programs, abstinence-only-until-marriage programs continue to lose their allure.

Of course, these changes and dialogues did not occur without passionate opposition. Some vocal community members, parents, and school administrators still warned of higher teen pregnancy rates as a result of more information and access to contraception, despite research that shows the opposite. They imposed their discomfort with certain materials, especially LGBTQ-related, upon youth in their communities in an attempt to prevent awareness of the nation’s sexual diversity and diverse sexuality education resources.

Regardless of protest, youth have increasingly become the most powerful voice in advocating for more comprehensive sex education. Well aware of the inadequacies of current curricula and their peers’ desire to learn more, youth in many communities have taken it upon themselves to push administrators to implement more comprehensive programs and to educate each other on necessary topics. Additionally, many LGBTQ youth have persisted in affirming their rights in their communities. With the support and allies of numerous organizations, parents, teachers, and community members, SIECUS is hopeful that youth advocates and their allies will continue to lead the fight towards comprehensive sex education and more tolerant and accepting school climates.

¹Michael McAuliffe, “Recommitment Made to Sex Ed,” The Republican, 1 September 2009, accessed, <http://www.masslive.com/hampfrank/republican/index.ssf?/base/news22/1251789700102320.xml&coll=1>.

²National Coalition to Support Sexuality Education. “Massachusetts State Profile,<http://www.ncsse.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1029&stopRedirect=1>

³Michael McAuliffe, “Recommitment Made to Sex Ed,” The Republican, 1 September 2009, accessed, <http://www.masslive.com/hampfrank/republican/index.ssf?/base/news22/1251789700102320.xml&coll=1>.

⁴Ibid.

⁵Ibid.

⁶JeanetteDeForge, “Holyoke School Committee Adopts Additional Sex Ed Program,” The Republican, 5 April 2010, accessed, <http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/04/holyoke_school_committee_adopt.ht ml>.

⁷ Ibid.

⁸ Ibid.

⁹O’Donnell, Christopher , “ A Rise In Teen Pregnancy Also Raises Concerns”, 25 January 2010, accessed, <http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20100125/ARTICLE/1251051/2055/NEWS?p=all&tc=pgall>

¹⁰Beau Berman, “Group SaysSex-Ed Program Could Be Successful in Time,” cbs7.com, 14 September 2009, accessed, <http://www.cbs7kosa.com/news/details.asp?ID=14966>.

¹¹Ibid.

¹² Dianna Wray, “SHAC Gives Sex-Ed a Plus,” OA Online, 9 June 2010, accessed, <http://www.oaoa.com/articles/sex-48377-school-ector.html>

¹³Melissa Newton, “Krum ISD Approves Sex-Ed Class,”cbs11.com, 9 December 2009, accessed, <http://cbs11tv.com/local/krum.ISD.sexual.2.1360983.html>.

¹⁴Britney Tabor, “Krum Mulls Sex Ed Course,” Denton Record Chronicle, 9 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/drc/localnews/stories/DRC_Krum_SexEd_1209.3353fbeeb.htm>.

¹⁶Ruth Campbell, “SchoolDistrict Looks for Solution to Rising Teen Pregnancy Rates,” 4 March 2010, accessed, <http://www.mywesttexas.com/articles/2010/03/05/news/top_stories/misd_student_health_advisory_council_teen_pregnancy.txt>.

¹⁷Kathleen Thurber, “Survey: Majority Support Some Sex Education,” 21 April 2010, accessed, <http://www.mywesttexas.com/news/top_stories/article_8388b389-aed9-5ffa-9f98-ff0fede6de84.html>.

¹⁸Ruth Campbell, “SchoolDistrict Looks for Solution to Rising Teen Pregnancy Rates,” 4 March 2010, accessed, <http://www.mywesttexas.com/articles/2010/03/05/news/top_stories/misd_student_health_advisory_council_teen_pregnancy.txt>.

¹⁹Kristyn Hartman, “Where Are the Teen Dads at Robeson High?”, 22 October 2009, accessed, <http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Robeson.High.pregnancies.2.1265889.html>.

²⁰Kristyn Hartman, “Why Did 1 in 7 Girls Get Pregnant at Robeson High?”, 15 October 2009, accessed, <http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Robeson.High.School.2.1251642.html>.

²¹WMTW, “RSU 60 School Board Holds Off On Contraception Decision,” 25 September 2009, accesses, <http://www.wmtw.com/news/21111847/detail.html>

²²Rose, Andrea, “Protest Against Noble High Goes Online,” 19 January 2010, accessed, <http://www.keepmecurrent.com/news/article_842454b4-054a-11df-9e54-001cc4c03286.html>

²³Burge, Kathleen, “ Revere Keeps School’s Contraception Policy,” 4 November 2009, accessed, <http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2009/11/04/revere_voters_keep_school_contraception_policy/>

²⁴ Ibid.

²⁷Journal Sentinel, “Evidence-Based And About Common Sense too,” 5 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/78556257.html>

²⁸Richards, Erin, “MPS To Discuss Providing Condoms to Students,” 2 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/78383087.html>

²⁹Ramirez, Marc, “Abortion Referral Puts Spotlight on School Based Health Centers,” 25 March 2010, accessed, <http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011445397_abortion26m.html>

³⁰Ibid.

³¹Walsh, Meghan, “School District Says No To Birth Control,” 15 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.theworldlink.com/articles/2009/12/15/news/doc4b27d16324fec665458187.txt>

³²Meyers, Jessica, “ Texas Sex Educators Take Tentative Steps Beyond Abstinence,” 9 November 2009, accessed, <http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/city/collin/plano/stories/110909dnmetsexed.434c861.html>

³³Ibid.

³⁴Ibid.

³⁵Ibid.

³⁶Ibid.

³⁷Katherine, Calos, “ Abstinence-Only Speaker Stirs Controversy,” 18 November 2009, accessed, <http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/local/article/FREE18_20091117-215602/306359/>

³⁸ Ibid.

³⁹Ibid.

⁴⁰Ibid.

⁴¹Kissell, Margo Rutledge, “Abstinence Crusader to Address Students,” 13 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/abstinence-crusader-to-address-students-705475.html>

⁴²Ibid.

⁴³Maricopa Monitor, “Sex Ed Getting Full Review in CG High School District,” 16 April, 2010, accessed, <http://www.trivalleycentral.com/articles/2010/04/16/maricopa_monitor/education/doc4bc756b1eeae1706566726.txt>

⁴⁴ Ibid.

⁴⁵Perea, Robert, “School Board To Reconsider Sex Ed Curricula,” 16 June 2010, accessed, <http://www.rgj.com/article/20100616/FERNLEY03/6160380/1306/FERNLEY>

⁴⁶ Ibid.

⁴⁷Maxwell, Lauren, “ The State of Sex Education: Part One,” 2 November 2009, accessed, <http://www.ktva.com/ci_13695102>

⁴⁸ Ibid.

⁴⁹ Marley, Patrick, “West Allis-West Milwaukee District Still Plans Elective Abstinence Only Class,” 26 February 2010, accessed, <http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/85607057.html>

⁵⁰Rodewald, Adam, “District Not Worried About Sex Ed Warning,” 19 April 2010, accessed, <http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20100419/OSH0101/4190372/1987/OSHbusiness/District-not-worried-about-sex-ed-warning>

⁵¹ Spicuzza, Mary, “Prosecutor Warns Teachers About New Sex Education Curricula,” 6 April 2010, accessed, <http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_0e1496a2-41e1-11df-aeea-001cc4c03286.html>

⁵² Rodewald, Adam, “District Not Worried About Sex Ed Warning,” 19 April 2010, accessed, <http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20100419/OSH0101/4190372/1987/OSHbusiness/District-not-worried-about-sex-ed-warning>

⁵³Ibid.

⁵⁴ Marley, Patrick, “West Allis-West Milwaukee District Still Plans Elective Abstinence Only Class,” 26 February 2010, accessed, <http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/85607057.html>

⁵⁵Lazich, Mary, “The 2009-2010 Legislative Session Review: Sex Education,” 15 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.newberlinnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/93844874.html>

⁵⁶Schultz, Frank, “Sex Education on School Board Agenda Tuesday,” 6 February 2010, accessed, <http://gazettextra.com/news/2010/feb/06/sex-education-school-board-agenda-tuesday/>

⁵⁷Ranallo, John, “ New Approach For Sex Ed,” 2 February 2010, accessed, <http://www.beloitdailynews.com/articles/2010/02/02/news/local_news/news202.txt>

⁵⁸Graf, Tyler, “ State Wants St. Helens To Revise Sex Ed Program,” 9 June 2010, accessed, <http://www.spotlightnews.net/news/story.php?story_id=127611227755134900>

⁵⁹Ibid.

⁶⁰Ibid.

⁶¹Memrick, Amanda, “Gaston Schools Chief To Outline Sex Discussion In Classrooms,” 5 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.gastongazette.com/news/schools-41165-chief-sex.html>

⁶²ACLU, “ Healthy Youth Act Goes to Governor’s Desk,” accessed, <http://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/?q=healthy-youth-act-goes-governors-desk>

⁶³Ibid.

⁶⁴ Public Policy Polling, “Easley Numbers Tank, 23 February, 2010, accessed, <http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_NC_223.pdf>

⁶⁵ Memrick, Amanda, “Gaston Schools Chief To Outline Sex Discussion In Classrooms,” 5 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.gastongazette.com/news/schools-41165-chief-sex.html>

⁶⁶ Ibid.

⁶⁷Graves, Bill, “Oregon Senate Passes Sex Education Bill,” 19 May 2009, accessed, <http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1242692708185370.xml&coll=7>

⁶⁸ Oregon Committee of Education, “House Bill 2509, 6 march 2009, accessed, <http://www.votesmart.org/billtext/25844.pdf>

⁶⁹Miller, Sheila, “ Bend-La Pine Set To Change Sex Education Policy,” 8 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091208/NEWS0107/912080391/1001/NEWS01&nav_category=news01>

⁷⁰Carmen, Barbara, “Abortion, Sex Education Spark Debate Over Planned Parenthood Grant,” 14 October 2009, accessed, <http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/10/14/copy/abortion.ART_ART_10-14-09_B3_IFFC8DS.html?adsec=politics&sid=101>

⁷¹Ibid.

⁷²Preston, Patrick, “Abortion Opponents Criticize Franklin County Commissioners For Planned Parenthood Sex Ed Contract,” 13 October 2009, accessed, <http://www2.nbc4i.com/cmh/news/local/article/abortion_opponents_criticize_franklin_county_commissioners_for_planned_pare/24829/>

⁷³Carmen, Barbara, “Abortion, Sex Education Spark Debate Over Planned Parenthood Grant,” 14 October 2009, accessed, <http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/10/14/copy/abortion.ART_ART_10-14-09_B3_IFFC8DS.html?adsec=politics&sid=101>

⁷⁴Ibid.

⁷⁵Vahl, Hannah, “ Sex Education Has Middletown High School Parents Concerned,” 9 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.middletownpress.com/articles/2009/12/09/news/doc4b1f0f3a4892f231369046.txt>

⁷⁶Ibid.

⁷⁷ Ibid.

⁷⁸ Ibid.

⁷⁹Otterman, Sharon, “Suspended Over Naughty Words in HIV Class, Teacher Wins U.S. Ruling,” 20 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/nyregion/21ruling.html>

⁸⁰ Ibid.

⁸¹Ibid.

⁸² Ibid.

⁸³Ross, Janell, “Nashville Schools To Decide Fate of Sex Ed Training,” 21 April, 2010, accessed, <http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100421/NEWS04/4210369/2066/NEWS03>

⁸⁴ Ibid.

⁸⁵Morris, Joe, “Nashville CARES Class Lands Agency In Front of School Board,” 10 April 2010, accessed, <http://www.outandaboutnewspaper.com/article/3964>

⁸⁶Jordan, Jessica, “Sex Course to Be Reevaluated,” 7 December 2009, accessed, <http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/article/26934/>

⁸⁷ Ibid.

⁸⁸DeMarinis, Rick and Kathy, “Proposed curriculum Is Inappropriate,” 27 June 2010, accessed, <http://helenair.com/news/opinion/article_7f99f9bc-81af-11df-ab6f-001cc4c03286.html>

⁸⁹Ibid.

⁹⁰Gouras, Matt, “Helena School Board Gets Earful On Sex Ed Proposal,” 14 July, 2010, accessed, <http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jAyJJPm2NGeA50Lero_jsfgAFkQD9GV3PMO0>

⁹¹KFBB News Team, “Controversy in Helena: New Sex Ed Program Pits Parents vs. Schools,” 14 July 2010, accessed, <http://www.kfbb.com/news/local/Controversy-in-Helena-New-Sex-Ed-Program-Pins-Parents-Vs-Schools-98469934.html>

⁹²Ibid.

⁹⁴Brown, Margaret, “After Snafu, Beye Less Tolerant to Some,” 16 February 2010, accessed, <http://www.wednesdayjournalonline.com/main.asp?SectionID=3&SubSectionID=3&ArticleID=16746>

⁹³Ibid.

⁹⁵Ahmed-Ullah, Noreen, “Dispute Over Gays Boils Over In Oak Park Schools,” 7 February 2010, accessed, <http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-0207-gay-in-oak-park-20100205,0,1456599.story>

⁹⁶Ibid.

⁹⁷ Ibid.

⁹⁸ Ibid.

⁹⁹“Students Seek Greater Consequences for Harassment of Gay Students,” Pioneer Local, 10 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.pioneerlocal.com/niles/news/2258314,niles-harrass-051310-s1.article>

¹⁰⁰ Ibid.

¹⁰¹Woodard, Teresa, “Students Want Sexual Orientation Added To The Non-Discrimination Policy,” 1 March 2010, accessed, <http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-kirkwood-gay-student-alliance-030110,0,3468952.story>

¹⁰²Ibid.

¹⁰³Bock, Jessica, “Kirkwood Students Continue To Fight For Ban of Discrimination Based On Sexual Orientation,” 7 March 2010, accessed, <http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/education/story/0C77B9CDE510865D862576DE0003EAE3?OpenDocument>

¹⁰⁴ Ibid.

105 Byrd, Shelia, “Mississippis School Prom Off After Lesbian’s Date Request, 10 March 2010, accessed, <http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iQRDDMNSipfZL1NVG-gK2OLZHJUwD9EC4KOO0>

¹⁰⁶ Byrd, Shelia, “Constance McMillen Prom Lawsuit Heard By Court: Lesbian Teen Wants School Dance For All,” 22 March 2010, accessed, <www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/22/constance-mcmillen-prom-l_n_508914.html>

¹⁰⁷Byrd, Shelia, “ Mississippi School Sued For Canceling Prom After Lesbian Date Request,” 12 March 2010, accessed, <www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/11/mississippi-school-sued-f_n_495639.html>

¹⁰⁸“Constance McMillen, Fake Prom? Itawamba Dance Was Kept Secret From Lesbian Teen, Huffington Post, 4 May 2010, accessed, <www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/05/constance-mcmillen-fake-p_n_525856.html>

¹⁰⁹“Gay Teens Misled About Real Prom?” MSNBC, 4 May 2010, accessed, <www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36178446/ns/us_news-life/>

¹¹⁰Ibid.

¹¹¹Kieffer, Chris and Wilson, Alisha, “Itawamba Prom Off, Then On Again,” Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, 31 March 2010, accessed 5 April 2010, <http://dailyme.com/story/2010033100002762/itawamba-prom.html>

¹¹²Ibid.

¹¹³“Lesbian, Girlfriend OK for Private Mississippi Prom,” Yahoo News, 30 March 2010, accessed 5 April 2010, <http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100330/ap_on_re_us/us_lesbian_prom_date>.

¹¹⁴ “Constance McMillen, Fake Prom? Itawamba Dance Was Kept Secret from Lesbian Teen,” Huffington Post, 5 April 2010, accessed 6 April 2010, <www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/05/constance-mcmillen-fake-p_n_525856.html>

¹¹⁵ “Gay Teens Misled about Real Prom? Girl in School Lawsuit Attends Dance with Just a Few Others,” MSNBC, 5 April 2010, accessed 5 April 2010. <www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36178446/ns/us_news-life/>

¹¹⁶“Mississippi School Agrees To Revise Policy and Pay Damages to Lesbian Teenager Denied Chance to Attend Prom,” ACLU, 20 July 2010, accessed, <http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/mississippi-school-agrees-revise-policy-and-pay-damages-lesbian-teenager-denied-chance-a>

¹¹⁷Winters, Rosemary, “Four St. George High Schools Allow Gay Clubs,” 27 April 2010, accessed, <http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14963088>

¹¹⁸ Ibid.

¹¹⁹Gillie, Tom, “Gay-Straight Clud Coming to THS?” 11 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.tooeletranscript.com/view/full_story/7405960/article-Gay-straight-club-coming-to-THS-?instance=home_news_1st_right>

¹²⁰ Ibid.

¹²¹Ely, Sean, “Corunna School Board Removes Display on Homosexuality,” October 26 2009, accessed, <http://www.argus-press.com/articles/2009/10/26/news/news9.txt>

¹²²Heywood, Todd, “Shiawassee County School District to Rescind Decision to Remove Gay History Month Display,” 28 October 2010, accessed, <http://michiganmessenger.com/28947/shiawassee-county-school-district-to-rescind-decision-to-remove-gay-history-month-display>

¹²³Ibid^.

¹²⁴Osborne, James, “Burlco School Board Bans Book On Homosexuality,” 5 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/20100505_Burlco_school_board_bans_book_on_homosexuality.html>

¹²⁵Osborne, James, “Activists See Momentum In Book Ban,” 6 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/nj/20100506_Activists_see_momentum_in_book_ban.html>

¹²⁶Flood, Alison, “School Ban On Gay Anthology Challenged By U.S. Free Speech Organizations,” 10 May 2010, accessed, <http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/may/10/gay-anthology-revolutionary-voices-censored>

¹²⁷ Ibid.

¹²⁸ Ibid.

¹²⁹Gang, Duane, “Menifee School Panel Will Review Banned Dictionary,” 22 January 2010, accessed, <http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_W_dictionary23.466f8d4.html>

¹³⁰Ibid.

¹³¹James, Haug, “Parents Ask Courts to Cancel Two Henderson School’s Play Productions,” 24 October 2009, accessed, <http://www.lvrj.com/news/parents-ask-court-to-cancel-two-henderson-schools-play-productions-65892392.html>

¹³²Ibid

¹³³Haug, James, “Play Goes On: Judge Allows High School Students To Perform,” 11 November 2010, accessed, <http://www.lvrj.com/news/judge-allows-high-school-students-s-to-perform-69740997.html>

¹³⁴Lieberman, Bruce, “Censorship Settlement Thrills Speech Advocates,” 25 January 2010, accessed, <http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jan/25/censorship-settlement-thrills-speech-advocates/>

¹³⁵ Ibid.

¹³⁶ Ibid.

¹³⁷ Ibid.

¹³⁸Joyner, Chris, “Girl In Tuxedo Denied A Place In School Yearbook,” 19 October 2010, accessed, <http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-10-18-yearbook-photo-lesbian_N.htm>

¹³⁹Ibid^.

¹⁴⁰Lynch, Adam, “School Cuts Gay Student Photo From Yearbook,” 26 April 2010, accessed, <http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/school_cuts_gay_student_photo_from_yearbook/>

¹⁴¹ Ibid.

POLICY & ADVOCACY

Support SIECUS!

Stay informed!

Quick Links