April 2008
Dedicated to Preserving Family Values
P.O. Box 66714, 38 King Street East,
Stoney Creek, ON CANADA L8G 5E6
| 4TH VERSION OF SEX-ED CURRICULUM NOW RELEASED (LOTS OF GOOD MIXED WITH POISON) |
|
HWFAC has been a steady watchdog over HWDSB sex-ed curriculum since the release of the first Board wide curriculum in the spring of 2000. A tremendous amount of effort has been spent by our Council evaluating, critiquing and reporting on each of the 4 versions to date and it has resulted each time in a product which is far better than what would have been if we had not been involved. In March of 2005 we were contacted by HWDSB to review what would be the 4th version. We critiqued the 400 page 4th edition, line by line over a 4-month period and then met with Superintendent Krys Croxall on 3 or 4 occasions over 30 months to discuss our written input and reinforce the importance of our comments. This has been a very draining process for both sides and in many ways we have seen substantial gains while also noting a sickening setback. Given the volume of the Grades 5-8 curriculum we cannot possibly begin to report on all of it and so we will simply highlight some of the positive and negative aspects. Positive aspects: The curriculum does have many positive activities and numerous times directs students to discuss things with their parents and clergy and this is excellent. It also, in several areas throughout the curriculum emphasizes the importance of choosing abstinence and provides examples helping students to decide ahead of time to choose abstinence and to avoid situations where their good choice could be compromised. There is a lot of emphasis in this regard and we are in full support. In particular, there are two very positive results which we will highlight. The first is that for each grade there is a Revised Protocol which provides clear direction that information letters inviting parents to view all resources including curriculum, videos and any other support resources be sent to parents a minimum of 2 weeks prior to curriculum delivery. It is essential that you do this and ensure that you have reviewed everything. Do not accept general and vague descriptions. For example, the Grade 7 Information Letter does state that one of the expectations of the Ontario Curriculum is that Students will, "explain the term abstinence as it applies to healthy sexuality" but what parent would expect that to mean that on page 7-61 under an abstinence activity that the curriculum would define anal intercourse as the sexual activity in which a penis enters another person's anus. The second aspect was in response to our comment regarding page 8-98 where it states: "In order to make a responsible decision about any type of sexual intercourse an adult must be : aware of all risks, willing to accept the consequences, capable of dealing with all consequences (physical, emotional, social, physical, spiritual, financial)." In comment, we wrote, "This would be a great opportunity to make the point that no Grade 8 student meets the criteria of making a responsible decision about sexual activity (unless of course that choice is to refrain)." To this area is now added in bold, "Most people are not ready for this type of relationship until they are adults." Ten years ago when we began our involvement with the sex-ed programming, the language of the day was 'safe-sex' and 'responsible sex', as if the condom suddenly made adolescent fornication safe and responsible. Today we both agree that sexual activity is for adults who are prepared to make adult decisions. This is a significant turning of the minds and we are thankful. Negative Aspects: Sadly, we must now report some very serious concerns, which to us are like rat poison in a bowl of nutritious cereal. The cereal may be full of nutrients, but it only takes a bit of the poison to destroy every benefit of the cereal. Do remember these are only some of the concerns. Grade 6: We are supportive of cross-sectional schematic-type anatomy diagrams for the purpose of learning basic anatomy, and many of the diagrams are in fact in this form. However, what we do not support are the detailed (almost photo-like), frontal views of the adult male penis, circumcised and uncircumcised (pg 6-40), and the female vagina with all labeling including the clitoris (pg. 6-48). We feel very strongly that 11-year-old girls will feel uncomfortable (if not frightened) by the graphic penis images and also very embarrassed as 11-year-old boys in the same room are viewing graphic images of the vagina. Some boys may not enjoy this experience while others may be sexually aroused. This type of graphic depiction in a setting of pubescent boys and girls will break down modesty barriers and lead to unwholesome playground talk and, in some cases, sexual experimentation. We requested that the Board remove such diagrams, however they responded, "Depicts reality" and "Found in 2002 curriculum." We objected to these diagrams in 2002, and in every edition since, but to no avail. The necessary information can be imparted in a schematic cross-section form, and is done so in all other Grades, except Grade 6. As a parent, we strongly encourage you to view Pages 6-40 and 6-48 and decide if they are something that you wish your child to study in a classroom setting. Grades 7 & 8: Our second serious concern is the many references to different 'types' of sexual intercourse throughout the Grade 7 & 8 sections. Over and over again, 'abstinence' is referred to as, "Choosing to avoid any type of sexual intercourse." It then goes on to describe what is meant by 'any type'. "'Any type' of intercourse refers to vaginal -the penis enters the vagina, oral - mouth is in contact with another person's genital areas, and anal - penis enters another person's anus." While all of the above are forms of sexual activity, we are not comfortable with the discussion as is. We, like the Board, do not want our children involved in any of the above. However this type of discussion in a classroom setting of pubescent adolescents will likely do more harm than good. How many of us as children understood that there was such an act as anal intercourse? When you did learn of this term, did you feel better for knowing, or a little sick to your stomach? Of further concern is that the curriculum says nothing about the elevated health risks associated with oral and anal sex; they are just another form of sexual intercourse. Let's be clear - oral and anal sex are unnatural and as such the human body is not created for such abuse. Physiological Consequences: For oral sex, semen contains many of the germs carried in the blood. Because of this, those who practice oral sex put themselves at virtually the same risk as consuming raw human blood and the associated medical risks. Anal intercourse is extremely dangerous. The rectum becomes a mixing bowl for saliva and its germs and/or an artificial lubricant, the recipient's own feces, and the germs, infections or substances present on the penis and seminal fluid of the inserter. Because sperm readily penetrates the rectal wall (which is only one cell thick) causing immunologic damage, and because tearing or bruising of the anal wall is very common during anal/penile sex, these substances gain almost direct access to the blood stream. It is probably the most sexually efficient way to spread hepatitis B, HIV syphilis, and a host of other blood-borne diseases. According to the Ministry of Health and Long-term Care, in 2004 for the Region of Toronto, 1 of 5 males who participate in anal intercourse were HIV positive which is approximately 200 times more prevalent than males from non-endemic countries who contract HIV from vaginal intercourse. By the end of this year the factor will be 1 of 4. At our last meeting with Superintendent Croxall we pressed again very strongly the case that anal intercourse should not be part of the curriculum, however if they were determined to include it then specific descriptions of the risks must be included. Unfortunately it remains in the curriculum without any specific descriptions. We contacted Superintendent Croxall to ask why this was so and received the following response, "We do not want to employ scare tactics." The facts are scary but that is all the more reason they must be provided. We are now setting up discussions to be held with Public Health and City Councillors. We will report back to you following those discussions. |
Top of Page
Back to Newsletter Articles Main Page
Back to HWFAC's Home Page