Yes, Sex Education in Kindergarten!

Sex education has made it into the presidential campaign, but not in the way I might have hoped.

I'd like to hear more about how sexuality education can be an important component of both educational policy and efforts to reduce unintended pregnancies. When almost nine in 10 Americans support schools' teaching young people about their sexuality, and when more than $1 billion has been spent on ineffective, abstinence-only-until-marriage programs over the last decade, the federal role in sexuality education is surely a topic worth discussing.

Yet it's the derisive comments about sexuality education in kindergarten that are dominating the debate, as if support for such an idea were beyond the pale. It's not. In fact, it is something that more than 150 public health, medical, religious and youth-serving organizations have been advocating for decades.

More than 15 years ago, while I was president of SIECUS the Sexuality and Information Council of the United States, I co-directed the development of Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education, Kindgergarten-12th Grade. The guidelines include developmentally appropriate messages for each grade level. At least 20 national religious organizations, including the National Council of the Churches of Christ, support K-12 sexuality education in public schools, and many have their own curricula for the children in their congregations. Our Whole Lives, the sex education curriculum from the Unitarian Universalist Association and the United Church of Christ, is a model K-12 program that is being taught in churches across America, kindergarteners and first-graders included. I wish all children received such fundamental and supportive programs.

Sex education in the early primary years sets a foundation for later, more in-depth education. It provides lessons on family roles, taking good care of your body and the correct names of body parts. It helps children feel good about their bodies, their gender and their families. To protect them against sexual abuse, it teaches children "no, go, tell" -- say no, get away, and tell an adult you trust what happened. It promotes parent/child communication around these issues.

A primary school curriculum does not teach five- and six-year-olds about sexual behaviors, contraceptive methods, or indeed anything at all about what most people think of as "sex." To suggest otherwise is a gross political distortion.

My theological commitment to truth telling means that I support sexuality education programs that are age appropriate, medically accurate, and acknowledge parents as the primary educators of their children. I wish political campaigns would make the same commitment.

Comments

[Berrysmom]

I'm with you, Debra. Knowledge is power, and don't we want our kids to be powerful when the time comes to make good decisions about their bodies? I am so fed up with people who think they can keep their kids safe by keeping them ignorant.

This is a cheap shot by the McCain campaign to garner the votes of people who aren't thinking, just jerking their knees (and my chain!)

[bselver]

I am a psychologist who works with adults, teens and couples. Daily I see the unfortunate results of too many people who have not learned good lessons about sexuality and positive relationships. I earnestly hope that my four grandchildren will not fall prey to the propaganda of people who fear the joy that loving relationships can provide. "Comprehensive sex education" means that children will learn about their bodies and human relationships just as they learn about everything else in their lives. But, it is not simply learning facts -- though that is essential. It is learning how to talk and to listen about important human behavior -- love, trust, honesty, passion, differences of opinion and interpretation. Outr sexual lives and the way that we use our sexuality has doomed too many people to disgrace. Ignorance is not bliss. We must educate the new generations to be able to talk about their sexuality far more comfortably than we have taught past generations.
Robert Selverstone, Ph.D.

[Lesliemk]

I couldn't agree more. Just as we teach the a,b,c's to kindergarteners so that they can read Shakespeare in high school, basic information about the names of body parts, the fact that children should be planned and wanted, and the importance of talking to trusted adults about questions are all part of age and developmentally appropriate sex education for young children. Yesterday, I asked my graduate students at Columbia to imagine the response the Obama campaign could make in a different world to the distorted McCain campaign ad. They came up with articulate descriptions of what sexuality education for kindergarteners should include--and their messages included the fact that we should all be able to agree on keeping our kids happy and healthy. Sadly, the issues these campaigns should be focusing on are getting lost in a McCain bid to scare voters and distort this issue.

[aammhh]

THANK YOU!!! I am so glad to see someone clear up this misrepresentation of sex education. It is high time people understand that sexuality education is much more than just about sexual activity. Of course it would be inappropriate to teach a 5-year-old about birth control and that is why this is not and wouold not be taught to them. This is about teaching children how to respect their bodies and other people's bodies and encouraging them to talk openly to their parents about their questions and concerns. I have not heard one person on either side of the political debate disagree that open communication about sexuality and sexual health between parents and their kids is vital. Why would anyone have a problem with educational programs that are designed to help this process?

[cbowers18]

Well, Debra, having been brought by the stork myself, I don't see why we should tell kids about the challenges and joys of sexuality. Keep this as a surprise until they're married. And I am the Queen of the May.

Pardon the sarcasm. Your post is dead-on. We need to continue vigilance against the forces of the political and religious right who advocate a "benign ignorance" which is not benign at all, and who insist upon their own privacy of choice while seeking to dictate to the privacy of others. Thanks for all you do.

Rev. Carl Bowers

[SpoxLogic]

Well, we've tried the "no education" approach, and we see how far that has taken us. So why not try the "education" approach.
Ignorance when it comes to sex is not bliss, and in this case, what you don't know can definitely hurt you.

[Rockerbabe]

Comprehensive sex education is a radical, common sense approach to teaching children about their bodies, their minds, their health and their relationships with people around them. It is really no different that teaching a diabetic about diet, insulin and exercise or a patient with heart disease about controlling blood pressure, fat intake, use of medications and exercise. It just seems the same.

Teaching children to care for themselves and to make good, informed decisions will go along way to reducing unintended pregnancies, decreasing the incidence of HIV/AIDS and all other STD and maybe just help decrease the incidence of domestic violence as women will have the confidence to remove themselves from potentially violent situations.

Of course, this teaching should also apply to our boys and young men. Many seem to think, sex is their right and without use of contraception or the bonds of committment. I wonder who taught them to think that? Come to think of it, have any of you ever seen or attended a purity committment with boys and their mothers or is that only for daughters and their father? I wonder!!

Bring on comprehensive health education - our kids deserve no less than the best.