<p>
Again, h.s. covers a wide age range, all the wider for the vast differences in maturity. I would not counsel <strong><em>ANY</em></strong> fourteen-year-old to go out and “enjoy sex,” and I think many parents feel the same way. There is a difference between educating someone on forms of birth control and condoning the “enjoyment” of sex at age 14.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>I inferred that the point of views expressed by the panel in Boulder are not ones you want as messages to high schoolers. The opposite message, therefore, is abstinence, right? </p>
<p>Telling kids that if they opt to have sex, to do so responsibly is one message and the other is abstinence, no?</p>
<p>I am not as appalled by the subjects discussed by that panel. That was my point. If you have a point of view that differs from the panel, then you are espousing that a differing point be espoused at school? That is what I infer. </p>
<p>From articles about the yearbook controversy, it appeared that some who opposed the teen pregnancy photo spread or the tatoo photo spread, wanted information imparted about the risks, etc. </p>
<p>I then assumed that if you don’t like the messages espoused in the Boulder panel, you might hope that an opposing viewpoint have been presented. In fact, the student and mother who protested that panel, did go on to say that they wanted the opposing view presented about abstinence and no drugs, etc. Since you seem to be applauding the mom and student who spoke out and appeared to agree with them, I inferred what I did.</p>
<p>The question I have raised twice on this thread and am still curious about but maybe some of you have chosen to not respond to, and that is fine of course, is…
Who decides which topics and points of view are appropriate in high school settings?</p>
<p>I do not adhere to an abstinence only view. My oldest children are very well aware of my views on sexual matters. I am not opposed to responsible premarital sex, but I have given my children STRONG messages that I do not think that many high schoolers are ready for the physical/emotional repercussions of an intimate relationship. In short, my message to high schoolers is very different than the message I would give to a mature, responsible college kid. To me, all of this discussion is best left in the home of the individual because there are so very many different views on these topics, and the high schools are not in the job of conveying values, IMHO.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>The way the panel presented the messages was over-the-top and in extremely poor taste. It is not so much the message as the presentation. Any adult should be able to see this, imo. It has nothing to do with religious/political views. The fact that people see this as a religious/political issue is a major part of the problem. Again, by saying that I have a problem with the subject your implications are clear.</p>
<p>I think it takes courage to speak out in these settings. One kid to stand up in front of an auditorium full of adults and kids who invited the panelists to speak? You bet I applaud this kid. </p>
<p>Do they not have the right to speak? If you don’t think so, your biases are clouding your own judgment.</p>
<p>
I asked this question many pages ago. IMHO there are simply too many different POVs to include any ONE group’s views. Better the schools stick to the job of academics and appropriate ECs.</p>
<p>I would agree that the high school should not convey values but they should convey information. Information about birth control is important even if one values that high schoolers refrain from sex all together. </p>
<p>I also think high schools are good places for debates about various viewpoints on such subjects. </p>
<p>Again, however, who decides which subject/topics or viewpoints are appropriate for a high school? Obviously, not all parents agree on these matters. Should a vocal minority decide? Should the community decide? Should the school board decide? The teachers? Who?</p>
<p>HH asked:
</p>
<p>What? Of course this student had a right to speak and be heard on her point of view! Where did I say she shouldn’t be? Similarly, the other points of view should be heard (the ones you don’t agree with). </p>
<p>Berurah, are you saying that school should only deal with “academics” and ECs? If so, no health education? No learning about the risks of drugs, unprotected sex, and so on? Also, what about healthy debate on current topics of interest to teens? </p>
<p>Besides all this, my question as to who decides goes beyond these topics. We have had vocal minorities (one or two parents) raise a lot of havoc at school over inclusion of certain books or materials in the classroom…even trying to oust teachers over such matters. Who DECIDES what is appropriate? I can give you one example if you would like though HH might accuse me of providing details from our school.</p>
<p>
Over the top is putting it mildly! During one part of the discussion, one of the speakers suggested that sex as sport is just fine and that an emotional connection between the two intimate partners was completely unnecessary. This is very contrary to what many people are teaching their kids. Why should a school weigh in on this subject at ALL? 
</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>If you won’t comment on whether or not you think the BHS panel discussion was appropriate the way it was presented, soozievt, there is no point in continuing this discussion. I truly doubt you could find one parent out of ten, even in Boulder, who was not shocked by it. It’s convenient to act as if anyone objecting to this sort of assembly is an abstinence-only religious zealot, but I doubt that’s the case.</p>
<p>Luckily, there are students and parents in the community who have more sense than the administrators of the school. The fact that they have the courage to come up against this pernicious behavior should be applauded; whether or not the sentiments are religiously motivated (as you attempted to paint them as being) is irrelevant.</p>
<p>
In MY view, yes, I’d love to see schools stick to the business of academic education. However, I have long since realized that this will not be. The compromise, IMHO, would be that some of these subjects be discussed without the infusion of values. There is a BIG difference between informing about various methods of birth control and tellling 14-year-olds that they should be “enjoying” sex and drugs responsibly. A good number of parents do NOT feel that 14 year olds should be having sex or taking drugs at ALL. Those are TWO DIFFERENT messages, one more objectionable than the other. </p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>Where did I ever mention religious motivation? HH, you keep pointing words in my mouth as well as assigning me motivations. You already got it wrong in thinking that I didn’t applaud the girl who spoke up and that I didn’t think she should be heard. I surely think it is good that she spoke up about her views. </p>
<p>I also did weigh in on whether I think the panel was appropriate. I said I didn’t have a problem with it. </p>
<p>I think all the points of view should be heard. I don’t think one set of parents should decide for all what can be discussed or not.</p>
<p>B…their job at school is to impart information such as safe sex, risks of pregnancy and drugs. As far as imparting values…either side of the topic IS a value. For instance, if a school preaches abstinence, that is one set of values. If it preaches safe sex without condoning young sex, that is a value. Imparting information about the choices is a good thing. Healthy debate where all views are heard is also a good thing. Pushing such topics into taboo territory is not a realistic thing. Drugs are a real problem. Discussing these things is important, no matter what one’s values are.</p>
<p>In the Boulder case, the mom and D who complained were asking for abstinence with regard to sex and drugs be presented. That is a value right there. It should be presented too. Just like the other options and how to be safe since realistically teens are engaging in these behaviors so they need information. Both sides of the issue are a set of values. The mom wanting to preach abstinence wants her value espoused at school. That’s fine. But there may be parents who want that other message also imparted. I don’t see much difference. Both are a set of values.</p>
<p>Sorry, I thought you expounded on your version of my views in some detail in an earlier post, including where I send my son to school. :)</p>
<p>The point is, as the student so intelligently pointed out, that just one side was presented. </p>
<p>Whether the other side will be remains to be seen.</p>
<p>
I agree. That is why I’m for omitting mention of either one. I do not think it is the school’s job to impart anything but the facts. I don’t want <em>any</em> of those people educating my kids on sex <em>or</em> drugs <em>or</em> anything. I have every reason to doubt their judgment on these matters.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>
I think that issues like sex and drug use can be viewed as a pyramid. At the bottom of the pyramid, most people have some level of agreement about what’s appropriate at what age. As you move up the pyramid, you will find that fewer people advocate a point of view, whether it is more conservative or more liberal – the views become more polarized. </p>
<p>So I think that most discussions in a public setting, a la the Boulder symposium, should cover the ground that is generally acceptable to most people. That probably means general, factual, non-values laden information. Many people would object to a discussion of sex that advocated experimentation among 14 year olds, and others would object to a discussion that advocated abstinence. Stick with the facts, imo.</p>
<p>One objection to the Boulder assembly is that it was mandatory and that it was not balanced. The points of view were extremely permissive – if Boulder parents objected, that’s an indication of how extreme it was. If my children were forced to listen to someone promote drug and/or sexual experimentation, I’d sue the school district.</p>
<p>As far as the question of who decides what’s appropriate, I don’t think that that’s very difficult. What would our parents say? There are behavior norms that have lasted for generations. Overtly sexual behavior in public would offend most people, for example. A basic guideline might have to do with legality. Drug use is illegal, and for a panelist to ENCOURAGE that behavior should be illegal. Many states define the age of consent for sexual behavior at 16, yet there were 14 and 15 year olds in that group. </p>
<p>What ever happend to common sense?</p>
<p>HH, I was saying in the post about where you send your kids to school is an option you have if you don’t like the values imparted or discussed at public school. I know you have spoken in the past with some displeasure as to some things taught at school.</p>
<p>
You are a very responsible parent. Kudos to you! :)</p>
<p>I well understood what you were saying and it is irrelevant to this particular discussion. Then again, I always wonder why past threads have to be brought into the present one. It seems to me that people should be able to state their views anew on each thread–who knows, maybe some views have evolved? Happens all the time to our presidential candidates! :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To quote–BINGO!!</p>
<p>Great points, sjmom, especially about the age of consent.</p>