What do you think of this?
Moms View Message Board: The Kitchen Table (Debating Board): What do you think of this?
I am in no way, shape or form homophobic. I have very close personal relationships with relatives who are lesbian or gay. However, I think it is totally inappropriate to discuss homosexual relationships, or any sexual relationship with 7 yr olds. This is a pretty big story in my state. What do you think?
LEXINGTON, Mass. -- There is more controversy at a Lexington elementary school, where once again a parent is upset about gay themes being inserted into the curriculum.
This time, the mother of a second-grader is upset that her son's teacher read the class a book highlighting two gay princes.
NewsCenter 5's Gail Huff reported that some parents of students at the Estabrook Elementary School are upset that the students were read a book called "King and King," the story of prince who is interested in the brother of the princess.
"My problem is that this issue of romantic attraction between two men is being presented to my 7-year-old as wonderful and good and the way things should be," parent Robin Wirthlin said. "We feel like 7 years old is not appropriate to introduce homosexual themes."
The Estabrook School is the same school that garnered attention last year after another father, David Parker, was arrested when he protested the school's decision to have his 5-year-old son's class read a book depicting gay families. Parker was arrested and banned from school property for refusing to leave without a promise from school officials that he would be notified in advance if similar material was going to be taught.
Although school officials said their goal in exposing the children to such topics was to be inclusive as possible, Parker's position was not tolerated.
"We want all of our families and all of the children to feel that they're welcome and included there, and one of the ways to do that is to show different kinds of families," school committee member Helen Cohen said.
The school superintendent, Paul Ash, issued a statement about the latest controversy saying, "The Lexington school system cherishes diversity ... we welcome children and families of all backgrounds, including families headed by same-sex parents."
Wirthlin said she and other parents should be notified in advance when such topics will be addressed so they can remove their children from the class.
Keep in mind, parents are not being offered the choice of opting out on this class. No notice or permission slip is being sent home beforehand.
I personally am pretty impressed that they are trying to make this theme more "normal". I don't see how this is introducing a sexual theme anymore than reading them Cinderella or any other kids story where there is a heterosexual love interest.
It must be nice for the kids of same sex parents to hear stories that are familiar to their lives instead of it always being one way.
Well, I think it was 2nd grade when the kids all started using the word "gay" to mean stupid or silly or whatever. That's gay. You're gay. The song is gay. That book is gay. That TV show is gay. Everything is gay. So to introduce what gay really means (currently, not historically) at that time might be nice. Normalize it. I mean, initially, these kids didn't even know what they were saying when they started throwing that word around.
I think elementary school is too young to discuss any topics which concern sexual preferences in the classroom.
That being said, the majority of children in K-5 schools live in households with a female and male in the roles of guardianship. Be it both biological, step, grandparents or single parents.
Living a a gay or lesbian household can be a loving and healthy relationship for a child. I think the parents in that household need to guide, teach, explain to the elementary child that it is not the norm and reinforce their values at home. It does not have to be a topic in the classroom.
My daughter's close friend's "Meemaw" is a lesbian and lives with her lover. We explained their lifestyle our way. On terms that we can discuss with the information we think she can handle for her age.
Sexual education is fine for middle school but I don't want that discussion opened up at the age of 7.
In the case stated, I would be upset that I wasn't notified first. I would have liked to read the book and know beforehand what the teacher would discuss and how far she would go into the discussion.
BTW, I have to approve books with controversial topics or language, in wriitng, on what my 14 year old is reading in class. The novel "1984" for example. Since I read the novel, knew the material and knew the points the teacher wanted to express upon, I'm fine with it.
I think that all parents have rights. That said, parents need to be notified when anything dealing with sexuality is going to be discussed, especially something possibly controversial. The school is not being asked not to include this material in the curriculum, just to let parents know when it will be introduced and discussed so they can opt out.
I have a big problem with schools teaching what should be introduced and talked about at home - especially at such a young age.
I am sorry that the parent who stood up for his rights and the rights of his child was punished instead of applauded.
We ALL have rights. That includes the right to disagree and the right to raise our children in the manner we feel is most acceptable.
But don't mind me. I still have a problem with fairy tales and the the violence in them and the way womens' roles are portrayed. I'd be very happy if my kids didn't read Cinderella or Rapunzel or the like until they were adults. LOL
Ame
I have explained to my children other lifestyles, including homesexual lifestyles. I am not a homophobic. I actually have a cousin who is gay and just opened a Bed and Breakfast with his partner.
However, I also have a soon to be seven year old, and I do not feel that this is an age level where they need to process this much information about sexuality. It is not the "normal" family lifestyle in America, and I completely agree with Annie that these sorts of topics need to be discussed at home with the children that they affect. "We live in this type of home. It isn't the typical family you will see most of your friends with, but it's okay. All families are different, but they are still families." Something along those lines. But it is the individual family's place to take care of this at home. It should not be forced upon all of the children at school. At the elementary age level, they are not mentally or emotionally ready to process all of this information.
My children know the definitions for these words. And they know not to use them in a derogatory way. But they do not know to have them incorporated in their lessons at school.
One of the things that bother's me the most about this, is that parents are not being notified and given the choice to opt out of this class.
I don't see a problem with it, it's teaching tolerance, just as we would expect our children to be tolerant of different races.
>> But it is the individual family's place to take care of this at home. It should not be forced upon all of the children at school. At the elementary age level, they are not mentally or emotionally ready to process all of this information.<<
I really don't think it's simply a family's place to address this. It isn't just a personal or family issue, it's one that communities, the media and schools have to deal with all the time.
And no, perhaps they aren't ready to process the information but why does mean they shouldn't get it? They'll listen, they'll hear that sometimes men love men and they'll move on to multiplication or recess. When the issue is revisited a few years down the line they'll have a new understanding of that story they heard an the subject won't be unfamiliar to them. The book talks about a truth, why deny kids that?
But just because you don't think it's a family only issue some other people do. I think this is a total disregard for the rights of those parents. You may think it's perfectly fine for this story to be read to your child, and that's great, but what if you didn't?
When we do the "touch talk" in kindergarten, I have to have send home a permission slip, with a copy of the book the kids are going to be given, and if the slip is not signed, those kids come with me to the library or the playground and the other kids stay for the talk. It really should be a parent's choice and these parents were not even aware that this was going to be read in class.
But, I think it's good for the kids whose parents are gay to talk openly about this. My son was playing with kids of gay couples starting when he was 4. It's obvious these kids have 2 mothers (in all 3 cases they were lesbian couples). You can't hide it. He currently doesn't have close friends with gay parents, but they are out there. By now, to him it's just another type of family.
But he still refers to everything as gay unless I specifically tell him we are going to be around a family member of friend who is gay and to cool it and he does.
I don't have an issue with this. We have a couple of families in our school where the parents are homosexual. The kids need to see their family represented as much as heterosexual families, single parents, grandparents raising kids, etc. I am not saying they need to have full discussions about what being homosexual is, but to include stories such as one with two princes is just fine, IMO.
This would be like saying "Ok, we're going to discuss african americans, and we need permission from your parents to do so. Dawn is right, in order to break the cycle of hate we need to address these things as a community, not just in homes. Families that are prejudiced against gays will create children the same way.
The parents should have been informed and given a choice. Why is it that we bend over backwards to respect the choices of others - especially those choices which are less "mainstream" and do not give those who are more conservative the same opportunity for choice?
Choice has to work both ways. That's my issue here.
As far as the subjcet matter being appropriate - I think it is not. Some kids who are exposed to mainstream media and other adult entertainment might be ready for it. For the kids who are not this will just open up too many questions - perhaps questions parents would rather not answer yet.
I know I don't want to be talking to my children about any kind of sex or sexuality at seven years old. And I certainly don't want the school doing it without my knowledge or consent.
Ame
Ditto Ame completely, and many others. I just feel like I could have written both of Ame's posts myself, only not as well!
a)I think 7yrs. old is not the time for this. If anyone thinks after reading this book that at least one child isn't going to say "WHy do two men live together or love each other or kiss?" or whatever, they're crazy. Then the teacher will be opened up to answering all kinds of questions regarding the homosexual family unit and I personally do not feel that is anyone's job to share except MY OWN. I was asked questions about homosexuals as a K teacher and I tried my best to keep my answer short and to the point because it's not my business to teach a family value to a child that's not my own.
b)The parents should have been notified and had the option to not participate. It is not "the norm" (at least where I live) to see gay and lesbian parents. Is it a reality, absolutely, but to a 7yr. old? Come on. This is not what they need to get into right now! Yes, if a question is asked, answer it with just enough info to get by. When they're older, talk away IMO. When my child asks me about gay/lesbian parents, *I* want to share my own family's beliefs about this.
c)I don't think race/sexual orientation are in any way, shape, or form relatable.
>>>Why is it that we bend over backwards to respect the choices of others - especially those choices which are less "mainstream" and do not give those who are more conservative the same opportunity for choice?<<<
I think this all the time!!! It's getting VERY old to me.
And regarding reading books like Cinderella to elem. kids, I never read anything about romantic love to my students when I taught elementary school. Love between families or pets, but never romantic love. I just don't think it's appropriate because again, I think parents teach/model/explain what "romantic love" means to them.
SO the best solution is to bury your head in the sand and assume these people aren't citizens with equal rights? I think the whole point is to teach TOLERANCE. It's not like they are saying "Go be GAY!!!" they are teaching children that not every family is the same, and whether you think it's appropriate or not for a 7 year old, chances are someone they know has 2 mommies or 2 daddies. Would you deny your child the chance to be friends with someone with gay parents? That is ridiculous. School isn't the end all be all of learning. Allow the children to be exposed to ideas whether they fit yours or not, and then DISCUSS them with your children and let YOUR views be known. Shielding them from reality isn't helping them.
I just think parents should be notified of anything related to sex or religion at school. And any type of romantic love them (hetero or homo) is sexual IMO.
OMG Crystal! If you think that just because you don't want your 7 yr. old hearing stories about homosexuals means you're homophobic or have your "head in the sand", that's ridiculous!! It just means that I feel those themes are inappropriate for second graders. I also just personally feel that (as stated in my previous post) that sex and religion are not topics for school discussion at the elem. level.
I think school is a great place to be exposed to different ideas that may or may not fit with my family values. But at 7??? Really. I think that's ridiculous. Middle school on up, okay we've got some great family discussions after school.
Seven year olds do need (IMO) a certain shielding of reality to some extent. Will I share gruesome news stories of rape and murder with my 7 yr. old? No. Will I tell her all about the swingers club that just came into town? No. It's not appropriate for her at 7. Will I tell her that the doctor that delivered her (and that I adore to no end)and gave me prenatal care is a "married" lesbian with 2 adopted children when she is 7? No. We will talk about all of that at a later time.
The age is just not appropriate IMO. Quite frankly, I don't feel ANY story of romantic love is appropriate at second grade. (Unless it's your own story as a parent, on your terms.)
Regardless, parents should have had the option to not participate in this. It's obvious that we all have different views on this, but apparently those of us who don't agree with it are supposed to be forced into our children listening to it? I just don't agree with that.
Some people might agree with this story and that's their opinion, but certainly shouldn't this be a parental choice to participate? At least we can agree on that!
That is precisely what I was trying to say Deanna. No one was telling the teacher to not read the book, only to give parents the option of whether or not to allow their child to hear it. Parents opt out of things at school all the time for religious or personal reasons - ie. The Pledge - there should have been parental notification on this.
However, while if explained in the proper terms, it can be appropriate. Especially when you consider the fact that their classmates MAY have homosexual parents. We start talking to our kids about drugs and sex early, so why is this different?? Would you expect your child not to learn about the Quakers and Puritans just because you are not religious?? I am not saying give them the gory details, but the story in question sounds VERY appropriate for a child of that age, considering how many homosexual couple have families now. So no, I don't think it should be a parental choice, you can't shield your child from reality forever. Here's another example. A friend was going through a divorce, and her and her children were moving. My kids were close to hers, and we had to explain that Miis Y and Mr E still love the girls, but are not going to be married anymore. Do you think I WANTED to discuss that with my 3 year olds? NO! But I had to explain, in terms that they understand, whay their friends were moving, and why Mr E didn't live there any more. We then explained that mommy and daddy still loved each other, and that we love them, and are NOT getting a divorce, and that was the end of it. I think the only parents who would opt out of the discussion of the homosexual book are those who are afraid to explain in kid terms that everyone is different, and that whether we agree with their choice or not is one thing, but we musy tolerate them. Had this not been a homosexual fairy tale, we would not be having this discussion, after all, Cinderella and Prince Charming have been icons for ages, their love affair was ok, so why is that ok, but this isn't?? Because THAT is mainstream, and people dislike anything not mainstream.
Another thought, then I'm done. MAYBE the teacher chose to discuss this story BECAUSE there is a child of a homosexual couple in the class. We don't know the facts there.
Crystal, I understand what you are saying, but why do you object to parental notification? If my children were going to have a lesson on something I might find objectionable for whatever reason, I would want to know and have the choice to let them have the experience or not? The reasons parents might opt out are not the big concern, at least for me. The issue is that the parent should have had a choice. I would want one. I respect everyones' right to a choice - even if I don't agree with what they are choosing.
Even if this was chosen because of a special circumstance, the teacher should have sent a simple note home. It couldn't hurt and would have avoided a great deal of problems.
I would want to know simply to be able to be prepared to answer my child's questions intelligently.
And just so you know - I'm not picking on you. I mean you no disrespect.
Ame
I am going to post MY stand point from MY Christian beliefs. While I do teach my children to accept and love everyone, and I mean everyone, I do not want the school showing them that homosexual behavior is right. They will learn in OUR church that it is a sin, how could I explain to them why their school is acting like it is no big deal. I am not homophobic, before anyone starts to say that. I just don't accept it being taught as the "norm" for my children.
That's the whole separation of church and state thing, though. Are you going to deny your child be taught evolution?? I'd hate to find out in 10 or 15 years that those who say it's "wrong" or a "sin" find their child is a homosexual.
Well I would hate that too, but if he is, then I would love him no matter what. If he is taught evolution, he will certainly know that that is not how we believe.
My daughter is in fourth grade. She knows the whole evolution thing. (even though this is another topic) She also believes it is utterly ridiculous. (Because of our religious beliefs).
My children can learn about things, and know how we believe, but it is all about timing.
Every year we get a letter stating that sex ed is going to begin and if we choose to opt out our children, then we may send a note to school.
It's all about choice in how we raise OUR children. I don't ever want that choice taken away.
Adena, I agree with you. It is all about timing and what we teach our kids at home and how we chose to raise our children.
Well put Adena.
>>>"However, while if explained in the proper terms, it can be appropriate."<<<
I completely agree, but don't you think the proper terms should come from the parent and not a stranger (i.e. the teacher)? If there's anyone here who wants to discuss gays and lesbians with their 7 year old, go for it because it's YOUR child, but the teacher doing it?
Evolution is taught waaaay later than second grade. When the theory of evolution comes into the curriculum, the age is really appropriate to discuss the particular beliefs of your own family. And I don't plan to talk about sex at all when my dd is 7; we will talk about good touch and bad touch so that she knows what is appropriate touching from anyone she comes into contact with.
Crystal, I think it sounds like what you're saying is that if we're not actively talking about gays to our children then we must be bad mouthing them and condemning them all to hell. That's simply not the case. It's just not anywhere near a topic of discussion for a 7yr. old unless it "needs" to be. Your divorce example, for instance: Your kids encountered a situation where a divorce took place and they didn't understand what was going on. You explained it to them in kid terms as best as you could because a personal, close-to-your-family situation arose. You just didn't start talking about divorced people one day just so we can include everyone and encourage "tolerance".
For me, the major point here is that the parents should always have a choice in school when it comes to sex and religion, and both of those topics are inappropriate for discussion with a 7yr. old unless it's by the parent(s).
You know there's something else that gets my goat....you can't say "Jesus" in school without getting slammed about church and state, but you can talk about ANYTHING else and it's A-okay. I just don't get it, and as I said before, it's getting sooooo old.
Crystal - I'm just curious, based on some other comments I remember from previous posts, how would you feel if the teacher was reading a passage of the Bible regarding creation? Would you want your child to be exposed to that if you don't believe in it? Wouldn't you want to know ahead of time so you're prepared when your kid walks through the door talking about God?(forget church and state for the moment)
Just curious.
I can't help but think that if you've put your child in public school you have (or should have) accepted the fact that the school is going to encourage values that benefit society as a whole, not simply reflect what you would like your children to learn. It's a government institution and it has an interest in shaping citizens. It's a communal atmosphere where community values, not family ones, reign. If a community value includes exposure to the idea that some people are gay, that's the schools right.
Reds - I'm jumping in here but I don't think hearing creation stories would be a big deal. Teaching them in science class would be but reading a story as a way of exposing them to different idea? Certainly not.
I only asked that because I *thought* from previous debates that Crystal had mentioned that she doesn't believe in God, so I just wondered how she would feel if this was being discussed with her kids in school. I may be wrong, but I thought that's what I remembered her saying before.
>>"If a community value includes exposure to the idea that some people are gay, that's the school's right."<<
It is also my right (or whoever) to remove their child from that scenario.
And it's funny that you say that about creation stories...I think it would be fine in science class because creation is scientific. I expect my DD to hear stories of creation in school, again just NOT at 7 years old.
Teaching any kind of sexual behaviour to a 7yr old is totally inappropriate.I have a very naive 7yr old and I like it like that.I will teach her at our own pace.Even being in a public school,they have no right to invade on my childs innocence.It is up to the parents to decide when there child would be ready for something like this.When they are in a higher grade level,my DD would have learned it at home by then and their wont be any confusion.I think its up to parent to decide on how much unformation is too much information.
Creation stories from any culture other than Judeo Christian would be acceptable. If a teacher was going to read the Adam and Eve story - it would be controversial and not acceptable in the public schools - at least where I taught. You certainly can't read the Christmas story or the Easter story or the Passover story. Even the Hanukah story might be a problem. You can read the Kwaanza story, you can read about Ramadan - you can tell stories from African and Indian cultures and religions.
Crystal, did you miss my question ? Let the public Schools teach what is in the curriculum, but why not inform the parents? Why such a resistance to informing parents and obtaining their consent?
To me, it would just be common courtesy.
Ame
I know that the Adam & Eve story is not acceptable in public school, I was just asking Crystal for a hypothetical situation since I *thought* she's against the teachings of the Bible.
I totally agree Tripletmom. Only discussed at that age by parents who choose to do so!
The reality is when parents send their kids to school, they are giving up a lot of power and control over what information is put in their children's brains.
I think it's good for kids to come home with information and the parents say, "No, I disagree with that. This is what I think." To me it's a better learning opportunity than keeping kids ignorant.
One of the more memorable learning moments for my son was when he came home with the book The Rainbow Fish which, to me, has to be the dumbest book with the most ridiculous "lesson" that I've ever heard. I threw it out the window and told my son that it was ridiculous to think that in order to have friends who have to share your wealth with them and I told him you should never judge or envy other people for what they have or don't have. I didn't call the school to complain or ask for the book to be banned. We talked about it, discussed why a school might think the book is good, and why I think it's absurd. This happened 4 years ago and we still discuss it even as recently as last night.
So I feel like whatever the schools send up, I can shoot down and my son will be enriched for the debate.
I think this teaches kids to be independent thinkers. How else will they learn to think for themselves if they don't learn early on that just because words come out of someone's mouth or just because words are typeset doesn't mean they are true or you agree with them.
I think I/school can teach my DD to be an independent thinker without sexual content involved.I'm not teaching my child to be ingnorant.I'm teaching her to respect other peoples feelings,teaching her regardless of race/colour/size that all people are the same.We all have feelings and treat people how she'd want to be treated.When she finds out that some kids have 2 moms/dads she will treat the child on how she has been taught RESPECTFUL.It is not up to the school to teach anything sexual to a 7yr old.I'd be very upset as a parent if I were not informed first.
That's a leap I don't make. Just because something reflects gay people doesn't mean it's about sex.
Just like when something reflects straight people, it doesn't mean it's about sex.
It's okay to just say that homosexuals are people who are attracted to people of the same gender just in the same way heterosexuals are people who attracted to people of the opposite gender. No one is saying let's get out Playboy magazine (and whatever similar magazine gays have). You can talk about either orientation without talking about specific activities they do naked in bed.
To be silent about these people's existence might lead children to think it's something to be ashamed about.
Its not anything to be ashamed of.I just don't think its appropriate for a 7yr to be introduced to it in school.I may word things differently than a teacher.I might give more/little informatiion on it.We haven't had to be put in a situation where their was a need to explain it yet.IMO I don't think its necessary to teach her this right now.How will these teachers respond to the questions some kids will ask.The teachers are going to give there point of view.I think the same sex couples have alot more explaining to do with there own kids in there homes.This does not affect my family and 7yrs old is too young to teach it in the classroom.
Again I will just say that IMO, ANY romantic love depicted to 7 yr olds is inappropriate. Romantic love DOES involve sex to some extent.
And this whole idea of not having any control over what your kids are learning in school: so that means if I can't/don't choose to/don't agree with homeschooling and I can't afford a private school then I'm just "stuck" with an education that I have no control over? That's why we have parent teacher conferences, newsletters, PTO, family meeting nights, and a ga-billion things to sign at the beginning of the year saying yes/no my kid can't do that. Parents DO have a right.
For the life of me I can't even begin to see why that's somehow wrong.
(And ditto on Rainbow Fish....) I read that story one time to my K's and that was over.
>>>>>>And it's funny that you say that about creation stories...I think it would be fine in science class because creation is scientific. >>>>
Oh boy. Oh dear.
Just...Oh boy.
If you want to clarify or back that up feel free to start another thread. I'm not sure it would be fair to derail this one.
>>>>>>>And this whole idea of not having any control over what your kids are learning in school: so that means if I can't/don't choose to/don't agree with homeschooling and I can't afford a private school then I'm just "stuck" with an education that I have no control over?>>>>>>>
It's not a matter of no control, it's a matter of accepting that the community around you that helps fund and run that school also some control and a say in what the school teaches. By sending a child to school you're involving the greater community in his or her education, you're expecting the school, the school board, the government to take some responsibility for your child's education.
I'm not saying you have no say. I'm saying you've willingly entered into a community that now also has a say.
BTW - My last two posts are directed to you Reds but I don't mean to be picking on you. Just sloppy posting technique.
Unschool - You're right, the public school absolutely decides what should be taught, and if I don't agree with it, then I should be able to pull my kid out of that subject/topic/situation. *I* don't think the book was appropriate for 7 yr. olds. While I don't think it should have been read, I'm not saying I want to control the school systems read-alouds, I just want to know so that I can pull my kid out in advance.
Regarding creation...I have no idea what you mean. Creation theories are both religious (Adam & Eve) and scientific (evolution). I see one theory as religious and the rest as being scientific.
And yes Unschool, I do think you're picking on me.
>>"Oh boy. Oh dear. Just...oh boy."<<
I find that to be very rude and derogatory, just as I find most of the posts you write that are directed at me.
"If you want to clarify or back that up feel free to start another thread. I'm not sure it would be fair to derail this one."
Reds, I agree. Either you believe the religious way of creation (Adam & Eve) or you believe the whole evolution thing which IS scientific. So, I guess I don't understand what needs to be "clarified or backed up".
While I haven't read all of the responses, for those of you who think 7 is too young to talk about this, please open your eyes. Today's kids are very informed. My 7 y/o knows about gay marriages and that a man and a man and a woman and a woman can be "married". He knows some kids have 2 mommies and some have 2 daddies.
He learned this in kindergarten on the playground. When he asked me about it, I sat both DS and DD down and talked about it. Did I expect to have that talk at such a young age? Nope. I figured it would be junior high or upper grade school at the earliest.
While we can plan on introducing our kids to certain topics when we feel it is appropriate, sometimes that choice is taken out of our hands and we had better be ready to roll with it.
With that said, I would like to be informed if the school was going to read a book or teach on a sticky subject just so I could prepare my kids for it and prepare myself for their questions.
When we moved here, 13 years ago, Sarah was 3 and Emily was 1. We lived 2 houses away from a gay couple! These guys were very nice and we often ended up talking to them, if they were outside, so at some point, between the ages of 3 and 7, Sarah learned a little bit about their lifestyle, because it came up!
I also had to answer questions about why the girl next door, had 2 daddies. The mom was divorced and remarried! LOL! So, I had to explain about the real dad and the stepdad, etc.
I don't remember exactly at what ages I had these discussions, because I don't remember when Sarah would have started asking questions. We lived in that house, from when she was 3-1/2 until she turned 7.
The whole book thing wouldn't have bothered me, any. By that time, the whole homosexual thing had already come up.
Again, your families were presented with a situation so you addressed it. Would you have just started a discussion about gay marriage if your kids were not being directly faced with it? I'm all for talking about when questions are aksed at 7, but I would like to keep gay/lesbian relationships out of my 7 yr. old heads IF possible. JMO
I've read all the posts, and have mixed feelings. I would not have wanted the school to be talking about sexuality to my sons at age 7, although I do think some recognition of sexuality by age 9 is good. On the other hand, a lot of schools start teaching "good touch, bad touch" fairly early, and this is something that should be taught at a very early age - and that is a sexuality issue.
My guess is that there is a mandate in that school system for teaching about diversity, and this book was one that was on the list as possible resources. I don't know that I would think it is the best resource if one of the points of diversity the system wants to teach is that some children have a mommie and a daddie, some children have only a mommie or a daddy in their house, and some children have two mommies or two daddies. If the system is teaching diversity starting in 2nd grade, I would much rather have had them use a book that talks about just that - how some families are different but they are all families.
Teaching about something doesn't mean promotion of that something. If it did, then teaching about different political systems could be seen as promoting those systems, and teaching *about* different cultures or faith systems could be decried as promoting those cultures or faith systems.
Yes, when your children go to public school because you can't afford private school, you are "stuck" with what the school system teaches. Most school systems have an opt out system when it comes to specific teaching about sex/sexuality, usually when "health" classes start in the middle school years, but I don't think parents should be able to opt their children out of everything the parents don't agree with. And I personally don't think parents should be able to opt their children out of the health classes that teach about sexuality. If your kids are in public school and you don't like what is being taught in a particular class, then you talk about it at home and explain why you don't like it, why you think it is wrong, and what you believe.
All of my sons went to public schools, mostly because I also could not afford private schools. I did a lot of home teaching in areas where I thought what they were being taught was wrong or deficient (ranging from spelling - you'd like to think when a teacher puts out a spelling list the words would be spelled correctly but sometimes they weren't - to inadequate teaching about the Holocaust, the Great Depression, the Dust Bowl, and political events in this country and around the world).
If your children watch television, they are exposed to all kinds of things you don't want them to know about (which is why I severely limited TV watching until my youngest was 13 or so). And they are exposed to all kinds of things that are antithetical to your family values in other media, and through their friends, starting at Kindergarten age or earlier, as related above. As a parent, it is your job to teach your values and the reasons behind your values, whether what your kids are hearing comes from school or any other place. Unless you home-school (and probably even if you do home-school) your children are going to be exposed to things you don't approve of, and you have to live with that fact and be prepared to address those issues.
Though it is probably a topic for another thread, I think our schools *should* teach about religion - certainly about the major faith structures in the world today, and the major faith structures in this country. I would quarrel with teaching about only one religion because that would be promoting that religion, but teaching about different religions exposes our children to the knowledge that people believe differently and their different beliefs shape their lives and cultures. So I think that the Christmas story, the Hannukah story and the Kwanza story should all be taught in December; and I think the creation stories from a variety of religions should be taught to show how different people from different cultures/religions think about how the world began. Personally, I think it is a great mistake to fail to teach what different peoples believe, because what people believe is a very important part of how different cultures developed and why some parts of the world are so problematic. Unless our children live in bubbles, they know about 9-11 and the war in Iraq, and a whole lot of other stuff, and they should be given some information that will help them understand some of it.
Most courts have held that teaching about different religions is quite acceptable, and the only legal problem arises when a school system teaches about only one religion or teaches the faith-based stories from only one religion. Some school systems do go off the deep end, of course, and ban all teaching about any religion, and I think that's a major mistake.
And, creation stories are not - NOT - science. They are faith-based stories of how people in a particular faith structure believe the word began. They are not science. Teaching about creation is teaching what a particular religion believes, and I very strongly think should only be taught if the creation stories of different religions are taught. Creationism is a pseudo-science promoted by evangelical christians as a way to counter the teaching of evolution, and is definitely teaching religion, not science. That, however, is a subject for another thread (and has been). If you want more background on this, read this site, which goes into detail about the federal trial in Dover, PA, and posts not only the judge's decision, but also transcripts of the testimony and trial transcripts and expert witness reports. http://www2.ncseweb.org/wp/ This site also touches on other trials around this topic and provides multiple links.
>>>>>>>>>And yes Unschool, I do think you're picking on me.
I find that to be very rude and derogatory, just as I find most of the posts you write that are directed at me.<<<<<<<
I think you and I hold very different views on a lot of things and so we'll end up clashing a lot. I responded to your two posts because they were so different from my opinions. I didn't even realize the second was yours until I doublechecked who wrote it after I wrote most of my response. My 'oh boy' comment was a cowardly ducking of the language Ginny rightfully used in addressing creation and science. And probably would have seemed rude as well to you if it came from me. But it would have been more honest of me and respectfull to you to use it. I'll keep that in mind in the future.
If we ever got to meet IRL I bet we'd have fun. We'd disagree on virtually everything but still would have a good time arguing.
I think we've lost sight of the real issue in this thread. The collateral issue is the appropriateness of the material for 7 year olds.
The REAL issue is that of INFORMED PARENTAL CONSENT - using caps because I don't know how to bold or create italics. I am not "yelling".
When I taught in the NYC public schools we taught multiculturalism and tolerance but did not discuss ssexuality specifically in elementary school. NYC schools tried a few years earlier with "Heather Has Two Mommies" and the public backlash was increadible. The book was pulled from the curriculum.
I am not going to agree or disagree with the decision to pull the book. I am using it as an example of how parents do have the power to choose what their children are exposed to.
Now, had the schools educated the parents through a PTA meeting and letters sent home as to why this was important, had they given parents the tools to deal with fear and uncertainty, had they given parents an opportunity to opt out, I think the outcome would have been different.
My children will be a little naieve. We do not watch any "adult" television infront of them. I prescreened Madagascar for them and decided it was too grown up. My children will not be sexually savvy at 7 and I don't want them to be.
Ame
I think the fact that this one post has caused so much controversy, merely highlights the fact that everyone has different feelings about this and are entitled to those feelings. Since this is such a controversial subject there really should be no question that the school should have notified the parents.
And just fyi - this book was NOT part of the normal curriculum. The school said that sex ed doesn't start until 5th grade and that this book wasn't part of the sex ed curriculum so there was no need to inform parents about it. I find it very hard to believe the teacher didn't think that SOME parents would be upset about this book.
Well, if the book was not part of the normal curriculum, how is it that it got read to the class? If it was the teacher's idea, she should have consulted with other teachers and/or the principal first, because she should have known that some parents would be upset.
As for parental control, well, I don't know how much control parents should have over the details of what is taught in their children's schools, but they should be informed about the general curriculum each year, and the texts that will be used. I have very mixed feelings on parents opting their children out of most classes in school, and generally I don't think it is a good idea.
To me the bottom line issue is the school knows some of the parents will tell their kids homosexuality is a sin and a bad thing and the school wants to counteract that message (as they see themselves more enlightened about real life). They'll expose the kids, then say Oops sorry, but the horse will already be out of the barn and the schools goal will be achieved.
On the one hand, I have some of the same progressive views on many issues that the public schools have, so it doesn't much matter to me (plus my child is in an independent progressive private school). On the other hand, I hate the fact that the public schools think they know better than the parents as to what is best for particular children. Teachers think they know better than parents. Just ask them! Teachers have lost all faith in parents' ability to raise kids. Go read some teacher message boards.
Regarding Mommmie's statement about teachers knowing better than parents: I think you're right in alot of cases. As a former teacher, I often felt that way. BUT...the student clientele makes that relative. I taught in a VERY poor, very under-privileged school where half the parents were in prison and the ones who weren't lived very unstable lives with multiple children. Many of the parents I did have hadn't completed ninth grade, let alone high school.I often felt that parents had lost all ability to raise children, but it was THOSE parents in-particular, in my specific situation. The parents I had couldn't take care of themselves, let alone their children. But I was in extenuating circumstances....I see where you're coming from. I've never taught in a school with "normal" parents!!
Ginny-Your last post about parents not always being able to opt out, but being aware of the curriculum- I agree completely. I think I may have said before that they should be able to opt out, and I think I'm like you - mixed feelings on that. Certainly I think there are probably situations where parents should be able to opt out (and I personally think this was one of them), but I don't think opting out should be the norm.
Unschool-I agree that we have very different views on things. You're probably right about meeting IRL....most of my dearest friends are completely opposite of me!!
Reds - it's the same in the privileged areas, I think, but different issues. Our school sends out requests like, "Please tell your housekeeper to leave some chores for your children to do to help them learn responsibility."
There is also an agreement high school parents choose to sign (or not sign) for other parents to view agreeing not to leave teens home alone while the parents travel and agreeing not to host any underage drinking parties - things that many well-off parents do.
They battle spoiled indulged kids and disconnected self absorbed parents. (The car pool line requires police supervision bec it can get so ugly with entitled parents violating traffic laws and almost running down school personnel who won't allow cutting in line.)
So many of these kids will never "need" to work so the parents often don't care if homework gets done or what classes are taken or what grades are made.
Course, the school also battles parents who can offer money in exchange for anything. When one of the seniors ran over and killed a 1st grader (walking with her mom to a public school), never did the city paper publish the school he attended. Money and connections protect the school's reputation and can be used for just about anything. These are kids who parents teach them to never let a policeman in their house without a search warrant. Well, maybe underprivileged parents teach their kids that, too.
Mommmie - I've heard that it's the same just different issues in privileged areas. I'm sure I would have had a whole different set of problems if I were on the other end of the spectrum.
Wow....that's crazy! I'm sure we could trade some stories from our opposite experiences. My parents didn't care if homework got done because they were 22, on meth, and making baby #4 with daddy #4. You don't know how many hungry little ones I sneaked some crackers to when they're bum parents got them to school late and they missed school breakfast. Heartbreaking to say the least. Your stories are heartbreaking, too, because regardless of rich or poor these parents are too engrossed in themselves to raise good kids. The cycle continues....
So, not only couldn't they GET breakfast for their own children, they couldn't get them to school on time for that breakfast either? Sheesh!
Homework is definitely done here and it's done by kids motivated to get it done! It doesn't matter if Gary and I are home or not. It just gets done.
I feel like I'm right in the middle between the two extremes of affluent parents and poor druggie parents.
I feel like our family is "in the middle" also, Dawn. People who here stories from my building can NEVER believe them. On the flip side, I visited a very upscale private school in Baltimore a few years ago and the teacher's stories there were like Mommmie mentioned. So sad.
I have kept letters from parents that looked something like this:
>>kan you pleez send hom som paper for timmy to right on cuz we aint got anymore thank you<<
No kidding. Then we (collective we) want to blame teachers because test scores are so bad.
Aaahhhh....I guess we're getting off topic here.
Oy! The mom should stock up on paper, when it's cheap in July and August, huh? Or would that be way too much planning ahead?
Sorry, you can get back to your post now!
Ok, to answer the questions directed at me...
1. Ame, I am not against parental notification, however I don't think there should be a required consent. This is PUBLIC school we're talking about, and whether you believe in homosexuality or not, it is a reality, and tolerance must be taught somehow. Many parents fail to teach that at home, and I applaude the teachers for teaching it in class. I take your questions with no disrespect, and actually agree that all parents should be informed of ALL aspects of the curriculum their children are taught.
2.Deanna, you and I rarely disagree, but we obviously do on this topic. That's fine. I'm not saying those who do not discuss homosexuality with their children are gay bashers, or homophobic, but it DOES need to be addressed. 7 year olds are getting close to puberty, so sexuality will come up in the near future. Again, I ask why it's ok to read a hetero love story to children, but not a homosexual story. You asked the same question as Ame, I do think we should, as parents, be informed of topics that are taught in our childrens' classes.
Now, as for creationism, it is most certainly NOT a science topic, it's a theology topic. I wouldn't be upset if it was discussed in school, but science is based on fact, and creationsism is a theological theory. Judeo-Christian or otherwise. Evolution is not a creationism theory.
Who here has READ this book?? We all seem to be assuming this is talking about sex, when it is more likely discussing romance. Mommmie said it well, it's simple to explain it without going into graphic details.
Regardless, I'll state one mroe time...
I think parents should be INFORMED, but consent should not be required. If you do not want your children exposed to anything against your beliefs, send them to private school or homeschool. Otherwise, you must expect them to occasionally learn about topics that you may not agree with. I am pretty sure I will end up homeschooling, and I fully intend to teach as many different theories/topics as possible, while explaining what WE believe, but that there are other beliefs.
Take a look at the book at amazon.com. There is a summary of the book, and many reviews. Most of the reviews are very positive. It is recommended for 4-8 year olds, I think it said.
7 years old and in second grade, I would have wanted to be notified of this book and given the chance to see it ahead of time and then decide if I wanted my dd in the class when it was read or not. I would not have been happy if I had no advance warning of it.
If in 5th grade and 12 years old, I have to give consent for her to watch a movie on HER body and the changes it is going through and all of that, I would only think that if the school was going to present a story to her that was based on " romantic attraction between two men is being presented to my 7-year-old as wonderful and good and the way things should be," I would think I would wanted to be given notification and have to give consent also.
LOL...oops, dd is only 11, not 12. LOL
|
Members
