-
Raymond Burnell, director of education at the California Catholic Conference, spoke June 15 at St. Bruno Parish about parental rights and California sex education. Burnell urged parents to opt out of sexual education that conflicts with their values. (Photo by Nicholas Wolfram Smith/Catholic San Francisco)
July 2, 2019
Nicholas Wolfram Smith
Parents concerned about what their children are taught in sexual education classes in California’s public schools have resources at their disposal to assert their values.
Raymond Burnell, director of education at the California Catholic Conference, said “it’s absolutely critical” for parents to become involved.
“It really does start with parents exercising their rights and responsibilities under the law,” he said.
Burnell spoke as part of a panel held June 15 at the St. Bruno parish hall to educate parents about sexual education in California and parental responses. Other members of the panel were Aileen Blachowski of Informed Parents of California, a parents’ group opposing comprehensive sexual education, who spoke about the graphic aspects of sexual education curricula; Ed Hopfner, director of marriage and family life for the archdiocese; and Missionary of Charity Sister Maria Concepcion. The event was sponsored by the archdiocesan Office of Human Life & Dignity.
Burnell emphasized that the California Healthy Youth Act, which governs sexual education in California, recognizes “parents and guardians have the ultimate responsibility for imparting values regarding human sexuality to their children.”
Parents have a legal right to review written and audiovisual materials used for sexual education and to supervise their child’s sexual education curriculum, he said. If they object to what is being taught, parents can excuse their child from sexual education classes by opting out in writing.
Burnell encouraged parents to learn what their children were being taught, opt out if they were concerned about the material and stand up against the school board if those rights were infringed on. “As a parent you are the most powerful person,” he said. “That’s your child.”
Prior to the passage of the California Healthy Youth Act in 2015, comprehensive sexual health education was optional and HIV prevention classes were mandatory for students in grades seven-12. Under the new law, classes on HIV prevention and comprehensive sexual education must be taught once in middle school and once in high school. Districts may decide to offer age-appropriate sexual education to younger grades.
Each school district chooses its sexual education curriculum, which among other requirements must be “appropriate for use with students of all races, genders, sexual orientations, and ethnic and cultural backgrounds; affirmatively recognize that people have different sexual orientations and be inclusive of same-sex relationships, and teach pupils about gender, gender expression, gender identity, and explore the harm of negative gender stereotypes.”
Instruction covers a wide variety of topics, including how HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases are passed on, the health risks of specific sexual activities and drugs, abstinence, the effectiveness of contraception, local clinics providing sexual health services, emergency contraception, abortion, sexual harassment and assault and sex trafficking.
The California Healthy Youth Act aims to help students protect themselves from HIV, sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy; foster healthy attitudes around “adolescent growth and development, body image, gender, sexual orientation, relationships, marriage, and family;” provide unbiased and comprehensive education around sexual health; give students the means to have healthy, safe relationships; and “promote understanding of sexuality as a normal part of human development.”
Curricula adhering to California Healthy Youth Act standards have raised opposition in several school districts, including Palo Alto, Cupertino, Fremont and San Diego. Parents have raised objections over their graphic content and impropriety.
Aileen Blachowski’s said sexual education has moved from a basic guide to changes in puberty to “an agenda-driven curriculum” that goes far beyond what is needed and normalizes a view of sexual activity “that is contrary to the Catholic teaching on sex.”
The California Health Education framework, which is a guidance document developed to help administrators and educators choose a curriculum that adheres to California law, encourages educators to challenge the binary view of gender.
One chapter states: “Fifth-grade students will have an opportunity to learn that gender is not strictly defined by physical anatomy or sex assigned at birth. Rather, students understand that gender refers to attitudes, feelings, characteristics, and behaviors that a given culture associates with being male or female.”
A lesson from “Teen Talk,” a middle school sexual education curriculum, has educators discuss different sexual acts and the risk of pregnancy or infection associated with each. “Be Real, Be Ready,” the sexual education curriculum of San Francisco Unified School District, uses Planned Parenthood videos in its instruction and notes that sexual pleasure “is often not discussed by health educators or health care providers. While some adults may feel uncomfortable discussing the details of sexual pleasure and function, it is an important topic.”
In order to push back against what is being taught, Blachowski said, “we need hundreds of parents like us. Participate in state events, get involved in your school board, and pray and fast. If you have the Eucharist you can do this.”
Parents who attended the meeting said they were surprised by what they learned. Mike Verceles, a parent from Hayward, said that health education was important but objected to how topics like sexual orientation were covered.
“They’re trying to indoctrinate our kids to go do what you want to do, have multiple partners, if you want to be a boy, go be a boy. They’re growing up way too fast, and they’re not able to be themselves,” he said.
Elizabeth Garcia, a Walnut Creek resident, said she was concerned students were “learning something that isn’t true to reality, that their integrity as a person is being withheld and there’s an agenda that’s being pushed.
“They’re messing with the whole paradigm of being human. It’s already been decided by the state and we didn’t have a voice in it,” she said.