Sex Education

The ACLU was out in force at our school board meeting on Wednesday night. The board would like to adopt a new proposal on sex education to replace the one adopted in 1994. The president of the school board quipped, "I guess that 1994 was longer ago that I thought it was." Apparently the school board adopted an "abstinence only policy" in 1994. Wasn't it Bill Clinton who was president then?"

I saw many visitors at this particular school board meeting. It turns out that they all favored the new board policy of a more comprehensive approach to sex education for adolescents. Two representatives from the ACLU spoke, one from a teen clinic and most interesting for me a young woman who was a graduate of Analy High School. She said that in her kindergarten through senior year education, she never received any sex education at all. I believe her and I know the source of the problem.

About the year 2000, in accordance with a district policy, Analy instituted a health education class. The big question became, "Who will teach it?" Since the ninth grade social studies curriculum is optional for college preparation, the administrators chose the social studies department to teach one quarter of health education. Most of the social studies teachers felt ill equipped to take this challenge on. Most social studies teachers felt especially ill equipped to teach sex education. No effort was made to in-service them on sex education or even health ed. So these teachers with fill it in whatever way they decided in their own curriculum. Some ignored the mandate completely.

Also the health textbook that was purchased in 2008, apparently has 12 pages on sex education that is extremely regressive according to one of the speakers. Instead of writing about sex (and drugs) in a positive way, it only emphasized negative consequences.

I've included my notes from the meeting if you are interested. It gives a little more detail on former programs promoted in this district. For a school board meeting it is interesting reading.


Letter M: Sex Education (Aligning it with the California Ed Code)

Old policy vs. new policy
Updating the policy to align with and reflect the more diverse population and listening to the sex education. We do not need to specify high school because we are a high school district.
No objection of the board members who will vote February 24

Members of the public:
Angie: Teen Health Advocacy Commission
Optimal adolescent health- comprehensive sexual health education
Abstinence Only group are not allowed to do their presentations to students.

Comprehensive Sex Education is more effective than Abstinence Only programs.

Abstinence Only has no effect on adolescent behavior.

Recommend discontinuing any use of abstinence only programs.


Speaker 1: “Free to be” was being taught at Brookhaven but the School Board didn’t know about it. Pointing out the textbook that they are using still has a “Free to be” literature in the textbook. I encourage you the read this textbook. (a 2008 adoption)


Speaker 2: ACLU of Northern California
Comprehensive Health Education- Science based medically accurate information about their sexuality. I am happy that the board is taking up this policy update.
Adopting a comprehensive curricululm- providing resources of supplemental materials.

Speaker 3: Public Health Nurse and served on the California Health
Core Competencies for Adolescent sexual Health.
Adopt a Curriculum that addresses all kind of adolescent health issues- mental health, etc.

Speaker 4
Chair of Volunteers of ACLU in Sonoma County . Former reporter. Healthy approach to family life, sex- the complete education- Encourage you to support the policy.
Create a transparent process:

Speaker 5: “I am a former Analy student. I didn’t get any sex education in all of my 12 years in the school system. “

Motion: Move that we approve the certification, corrective action.

Board Comments or questions.
Public Comments or questions. None

Passed