http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2009/10/30/north_attleboro/...
BY BRITTANY ABERY and JUSTIN MEISINGER FOR THE SUN CHRONICLE
Tuesday, October 20, 2009 2:21 AM EDT
An attempt to require parental approval before students receive sex education isn't garnering much support from area educators.
North Attleboro High School Principal Robert Gay says legislation that would require parents to approve sex education for their children is unnecessary and could create more problems.
"I've been here nine years, and a principal for 15, and no one's ever brought that issue up to me," Gay said. "It'll just make it more difficult."
State Rep. Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro, is sponsoring a bill that would require parents to give their approval before their children could take sex education courses.
Under current law, students take the courses unless their parents formally request they be excused.
"The more parents can see what's going on and then decide, the better," Poirier said in an interview.
She testified in favor of the legislation last week before the Joint Committee on Education.
Poirier said requiring parents to give formal approval gets them more involved in the process.
"When it comes to permission slips, they can sometimes get lost in the bottom of backpacks, or not come back to school or never make it home in the first place," she said.
But Gay said the opt-out system hasn't been an issue in his school.
"Actually, I think the opt-out system has worked very well here," he said.
Gay said the portion of the bill that requires schools to make their sex education curriculum available to parents before the class is also unnecessary.
"We have that information on file in the office if parents want to come and see it," he said.
Dianne Luby, president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, agreed.
"This bill creates an unnecessary obstacle to keeping Massachusetts kids healthy and safe," she said.
Andrea Miller, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts said the current law works.
"The current opt-out law already strikes a careful, appropriate balance that respects parents' role in helping to direct their child's education," Miller said.
Miller said changing the law would create an "added administrative burden on our already overburdened and underfunded school systems."
Poirier's is one of four similar bills filed last January to be addressed by the Legislature in the 2009-2010 session.
The bills also allow educators to opt out of teaching sex education classes if the curriculum goes against their religious beliefs or makes them uncomfortable.
"The government is assuming to teach all things sexual, and it shouldn't be that way," Poirier said. "I think that families are a better judge of a child's maturity than schools."
Marie Sturgis, executive director and legislative director of Mass Citizens for Life, testified on behalf of the bill.
"Parents need to be notified and choose whether they want their child to get involved in this or not," Sturgis, a mother of five, said in an interview. "Schools just teach it now, and get the consequences later."
"It's common sense to ask parents first. It's common sense of neighbors and relatives to ask first and find out if they have permission to teach children things that can be private and not taught in a warehouse kind of setting."
"There's tremendous logic in having parents opt in if they choose instead of do the reverse and opt out," Sturgis said. "Parents are unaware most of the time that this is even going on. They aren't mind readers to know their kids are being taught sex education."
"One of the problems with current sex education is they are explaining the law to students instead of the parents, and they're teaching students how to get abortions under the parents' radar, and this is totally wrong," she said. |
