Parents Must Assert Rights Over School Authorities

What do you all think of this?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160289,00.html

Back when Americans actually had rights parents were given the option of opting their children out of sex ed. Soon we will see children just taken from their parents and put into kid farms where they will be indoctrinated ohh they already do that it's just called public school.

wow

I do not like the idea of questionares like this sent to schools.

Seems a huge overstepping of a system which is only intended to educate children. And the fact that the parent must know and then Opt their child out is bacwards.

You can blame the Federal Board of Education for that. States get money from gov-co for the schools provided they follow the rules and do exactly what gov-co tells them to do. This questionaire, provided by the federally controlled CDC for use by the Board of Education, is just one of the examples of why the Federal Board of Education should be completely abolished. Rights are completely removed from the states and by attrition from the parents of the children.

When the school systems fail miserably at teaching basic skills they should not be charged with the responsibility of determining sexual activity of minors or training children in the sexual department especially at such young ages. That said if they are going to take on the responsibility parents should at the very least be given the option of not participating in the survey.

Oh man, I am so calling the Board of Education on this one.

The fact that they even ask these questions in a "anonymous" survey is just nuts. Think about it, if a 40 year old pedophile asked any child under the age of 18 "have you ever had oral sex? and when was the last time?", it would be an outcry.

For the Board of Education, federal or state, to ask these questions of children is wrong. They are completely intrusive and hover on interrogation. Not to mention, these questions are basically trying to gather demographics on students. I am sure they keep these files segregated by school so they can tell "oh this inner city school has higher crime, drug usage and underage sex than this affluent suburban school district does."

Its f*n amazing to me how they can preach on one hand for people to "BE INVOLVED" with their children and education but yet try to send out sneaky surveys like this.

Tempest in a teapot. The fact of the matter is, if you want to have an accurate survey of teens and pre-teens, you have to protect kids not from the system, but from the hysterical overreaction of certain parents.

Given that the writer of the article wants to replace free and universal public education with "privatization", I'm not surprised that she's trying to stir something up where nothing much is there. School privatization is a hard sell unless you can really demonize public education. It's telling of their real agenda that they choose the spectre of teen sexuality as their lead boogeyman.

I should say from the outset that I am not against children being appropriately informed about sex, and I would not have any problem talking to my 10 year old daughter about oral sex IF she initiated the discussion and wanted to know about it.

The problem I see with letting authorities question children or inform them about sex, is that the information they provide may be completely inappropriate to the child. A question like that - how often do you have oral sex? - put to anyone, will start a whole dialogue going in their head. It might be "what's oral sex?" if an 11 year old. It might be "should I be having it?...or Why aren't I having it? or Is everyone else having it?" It might be "Is kissing oral sex?", and a child might answer such a question inaccurately.

In the UK the Government has set up a network of "Connexions" counsellors, who have the responsibility for questioning children one to one. They are generally given six weeks' training, and many of them do not have prior experience of working with the 13-19 years olds they are supposed to look after.

The number and range of questions which they are supposed to cover with the teenagers beggars belief. It includes divining the teenager's experience of sexual abuse, their eating disorders, their family's attitutude to substance abuse, their work ethic. I think many highly trained counsellors would be reluctant to question anyone directly about many of these things....

One of the reasons I am a home educator - and there are many - is that I think the state makes a very poor parent indeed. If you look at the evidence - the lives that children who are in the care of the state lead, their academic success or lack of it - the state does not parent well.

People often think that home educators wish to keep their children wrapped in cotton wool, away from the realities of life, and there are some who are like that. But mostly I want my children to be in the world, able to ask for and get good information on everything when it is right for them. Generally, I leave it up to my children to ask for the answers they require. The older ones have asked about oral sex, having heard references to it on television, and I have given them the information they have asked for.

It takes a lot of sensitivity and good listening skills to be able to make the information appropriate, and I don't think it is a task which any teacher can perform with a group of children, really. On the other hand, there are many parents in the Uk who rely upon the fact that sex is covered in schools to inform their offspring - something I cannot understand at all.

My friend Jo told me a story which demonstrates how closely one must listen to make the information one provides appropriate to the child. On the way to school one morning with her 10 year old daughter and 8 year old son, her daughter turned to her and asked "What's aids Mummy?"
She took a deep breath, thinking that it was rather early in the morning for such questions, and it was going to be hard to explain in the short journey to school. She paused and said :"What made you ask that?"
Her daughter fished around in her pocket and came up with a crumpled form from school:
"Because it says we should bring swimming aids if worn, and I don't know what aids is."

I have some links to alternative thinking on education which will fit here as well as anywhere

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com
http://edheretics.gn.apc.org/EHT004.htm
www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/books/files/homeschool.pdf
http://www.dur.ac.uk/p.j.rothermel/Research/Researchpaper/BERAworkingpaper.htm
bws
Cali

They governement should not have the right to question children without the parents knowledge on any subject.

Its invasive.

Sex, Income level, how many pets you have - doesnt matter.

You are probably right the article's focus is likely to argue for privitzation of schools. I dont see where the two subjects necessarily need to be linked though.

The correct answer is - Dont let school ask these questions, its overstepping the schools purpose.

Its not - see how bad public schools are? , so support vouchers.

--------------------
If the CDC needs information they can have a volunatry questionares on College campus's with 18-22 year olds. Things dont change that much in 7-10 years on cultural mores and behaviors.

If its a more immediate need , like drug use , well they will have crime statistics.

I have to agree with you....but it is not the public schools asking the questions it is the CDC using the public schools as a bridge to question children without parental consent. This is not a state run public school problem it is a problem with the increasing influence of the federal govco on state supported public schools who desire the pittance govco throws them via free lunch programs and the like.

I am not necessarily for or against privitization of the school systems but I am against the federal government exploiting the state schools for their own gain. If the individual states choose to privatize in order to get out from under the control of the fed govco then more power to them.

They already performed a survey called the NCHRBS in 1995 where they sampled 5000 undergrads with pretty much the same survey and then again in 1998 where they
conducted a similar survey, the NAHSYRB among 9000 alternative highschool students. This current survey, the YRBSS, has been in the works since 1992 and is just one part of a larger governmental program known as the Healthy People 2010 program. I was surprised to see just how much of the govco beaurocracy is tied up in the effort.



healthy people 2010
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
* Access to Quality Health Care (Co-Lead)
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
* Environmental Health (Co-Lead)
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
* Arthritis, Osteoporosis, and Chronic Back Conditions (Co-Lead)
* Cancer (Co-Lead)
* Diabetes (Co-Lead)
* Disability and Secondary Conditions (Co-Lead)
* Educational and Community-Based Programs (Co-Lead)
* Environmental Health (Co-Lead)
* Heart Disease and Stroke (Co-Lead)
* HIV (Co-Lead)
* Immunization and Infectious Diseases (Lead)
* Injury and Violence Prevention (Lead)
* Maternal, Infant, and Child Health (Co-Lead)
* Occupational Safety and Health (Lead)
* Oral Health (Co-Lead)
* Physical Activity and Fitness (Co-Lead)
* Public Health Infrastructure (Co-Lead)
* Respiratory Diseases (Co-Lead)
* Sexually Transmitted Diseases (Lead)
* Tobacco Use (Lead)
Food and Drug Administration
* Food Safety (Co-Lead)
* Medical Product Safety (Lead)
* Nutrition and Overweight (Co-Lead)
Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
* Food Safety (Co-Lead)
Health Resources and Services Administration
* Access to Quality Health Care (Co-Lead)
* Educational and Community-Based Programs (Co-Lead)
* HIV (Co-Lead)
* Maternal, Infant, and Child Health (Co-Lead)
* Oral Health (Co-Lead)
* Public Health Infrastructure (Co-Lead)
Indian Health Service
* Oral Health (Co-Lead)
National Institutes of Health
* Arthritis, Osteoporosis, and Chronic Back Conditions (Co-Lead)
* Cancer (Co-Lead)
* Chronic Kidney Disease (Lead)
* Diabetes (Co-Lead)
* Environmental Health (Co-Lead)
* Heart Disease and Stroke (Co-Lead)
* Mental Health and Mental Disorders (Co-Lead)
* Nutrition and Overweight (Co-Lead)
* Oral Health (Co-Lead)
* Respiratory Diseases (Co-Lead)
* Substance Abuse (Co-Lead)
* Vision and Hearing (Lead)
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, U.S. Department of Education
* Disability and Secondary Conditions (Co-Lead)
Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
* Health Communication (Lead)
Office of Population Affairs
* Family Planning (Lead)
President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports
* Physical Activity and Fitness (Co-Lead)
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
* Mental Health and Mental Disorders (Co-Lead)
* Substance Abuse (Co-Lead)

/rant on

I have a 12 year old son. I am pretty disgusted by our local school district. We stay pretty involved, from chaperoning field trips, to teacher conferences, attending any special events that happen.

My son has gone to three different schools now within the school district. They have all been severely lacking.

While there are usually a few dedicated, good teachers, others have character flaws a mile wide, or are so bitter and burned out that the children in their classes can easily sense and comment on it.

We've had some pretty horrible experiences with a few of them, fighting, and winning, battles where we were lied to, ignored, placated and finally apologized to. It's not a matter of money or too full classes either. It is simply a matter of idiots not doing their jobs, teachers being allowed to continue teaching when it's shown they are bullies, teachers that act like children themselves, burnouts or have very specific problems - like our son's second grade teacher that got many complaints about losing his temper and saying very mean things to his class, and then had a bunch of bullets fall out of his bag in the classroom, when my ex-wife was there to witness. It still took us 6 months to get his ass booted out of that school, even with numerous other complaints by parents about his violent temper tantrums. Of course, the next year he was back as a substitue teacher, and wouldn't suprise me a bit if they'd snuck him in as a fulltimer by now.

Presently, one of my son's teachers is a woman that you can tell, after speaking with her for 20 seconds, is one of the most transparently arrogant, opinionated, shallow and bullying people I've ever met. My son complains about her everyday, not about treatment directed at him, but about mean and spiteful comments she makes to others in the class, with the sole purpose of humiliating them or embarressing them. I actually got in her face in a teacher/parent conference, when she presumed to tell me how to raise my son. who is such a good and smart kid, and snorted when I told her about my son's Panic Anxiety disorder.

edit: Forgot to mention she also preaches neo-conservatism to her class and makes negative comments about liberals.

We've complained about her to the school a few times, and strangely each time we have, they've stated that this has been the only complaint about her, even though we know of two other parents that have called to complain about her, and we ourselves have called to complain about her in the past. It is so discouraging. And there is no excuse for it other than apathetic people and idiocy.

/rant off

Here is a website I enjoy:

Alliance for the Separation of School & State
http://honestedu.org/

An anonymous survey isn't invasive at all.

If there was any evidence that it wasn't anonymous, that kids were being singled out for their responses, I might feel differently. But the author didn't provide any proof that this was actually happening - she just took it as a given.

The CDC has the obligation and the mandate to study risk behaviors. The problem with a voluntary survey on the subject in any environment is that the people who aren't prone to volunteer may be the ones who most need to be included for an accurate assessment. Attitudes (and memories!) can change drastically between the ages of 12 and 21. Knowing when people start certain behaviors is necessary to know when it's appropriate to educate them about the risks involved.

And if you think parents know best, consider the things you got away with that your parents never knew about. If you don't have any stories of that sort, nominate yourself for sainthood.

I just wonder how many kids actually answered truthfully on a sex questionaire?
I know I made up answers whenever some sort of student survey came around.

Of course I did a lot of things my parents didnt know about. It doesnt change the fact that parents are responsible for their children and any thing of this sort they are exposed to is within the realm of the parents right to decide.

I would be like I said opposed to them asking how many cars and computers, etc their parents had, how may CDs they had, how many pairs of jeans they owned also. I dont see that as a role of school or governemnt.

I presume the CDC's interest is to secure funding to help combat STD's and Drug abuse?

As for voluntary surveys -- I dont think the government should have the right to require ANYONE in the US to answer a survey.

Literally the government should never be able to ask you the question "Have you had oral sex?"

If theres a huge need and for some crazy reason they have to then it Better be voluntary only - and Parents have to be the ones who decide IF their kids answer on any privacy information.

And the kids shouldnt have to answer if they dont want to anyway. They have a right to privacy too.

I think that the government is overstepping their bounds on this one by leaps.

I understand the need for the CDC to compile data, but that can come from clinics, ER's and physicians and the data will be far more accurate than it will be from a 12 year old.

When I see questions like:



It would not be very difficult for a teacher to code a survey so that it can be traced back to a student. If that gets entered into a federal database and happens to follow the student through life, well what then? Will it affect their chances at getting a good job? Will it affect their chances at getting a job that requires a government clearance? If so, then parents should be seriously concerned.

Also, are questions like this a prerequisite to acclimate our children to report on their peers and parents? Question 10 is certainly a lead in to that.

When I see parents forced to put their children on medication (like Ritalin or anti-depressants) because if they don't, then the Child Protective Services will step in and take the children from the home, I am seriously concerned about just how far our government will go. In other words, is [this person] your child or are they merely a government asset.

This little survey is very intrusive and if I had a child of school age, I would not allow my child to respond to the survey. If the survey was a requirement, then yes, I would pull my child from public school and I strongly support public schooling. Frankly, as an adult I would not answer a survey like this.

The whole teacher suggested ritalin concept is a tragedy.

When my daughter was in 1st grade my daughters teacher called and suggested she get evaluated to see if she needed treatment for ADHD becuase "She wont stop talking in class"

She didnt ask me to talk to my daughter about talking to much, She didnt ask me my opinion. She said my daughter was hyperactive and needed to see a psych. to see if she needed ritalin. She said many of the other kids were on it and it helped a lot.

Needless to say my daughter, now a Honors student and an aspiring musician, never was put on ritalin. She still talks a lot. I dont think anyone would call her hyperactive now though.

I think that's a big "if". Maybe I was fortunate in my education, but the teachers I knew would almost universally balk if asked to fudge an "anonymous" survey to be unanonymous, and if unable to balk would certainly blow the whistle. The possibility exists, but I think the possibility of it happening and remaining undisclosed is rather small, and the potential backlash would deter any would-be database compilers.

A statistical survey doesn't ask you to name names or provide details - it just counts numbers to compile aggregate statistics. That allows researchers to focus their efforts where it might do the most good. For example, prevention programs targeted at 18-year-olds aimed at curbing sexually-transmitted diseases might be tragically too late if teens are engaging in unprotected sex at 16 (or 14 or even 12).

Too often the policy decisions are made in an information vacuum. What we get are exaggerated efforts motivated by fear targeted at low-risk groups, countered by a total lack of concern (and funding) in regions and contexts where the problems are endemic. The first step in addressing the problems is accurate information.

Maybe parents need a more obvious "opt-out" option, but "opt-in" could sink the study in the very areas where it's needed most: those where apathy, hysteria, paranoia and prudishness cripple the ability of scientific inquiry to do its job.

I am all for Sex Education and Disease prevention Education as part of a School Health Education.

I think it should be funded without surveys to justify the spending.

And presented in a manner that is educational in scope, not attempting to aquire information.

I am for prevention of Drug Abuse and Alchol Abuse with Education as part of Health Education also.

And I think the age for starting the Education shoudl be aroun 12 or so. And parents should during orientation that year for school given the alternative to opt their child out.

That was my thought exactly. The questions are really stupidly worded. If you ask "how old were you when you tried marijauna for the first time?" that's going to make some kids think "hmmm, was I supposed to try it?" It makes it sound as though they already should have and that it's the norm to have already done it.

An interesting thought occured to me after reading Chip's post.

At least at one time - I believe its still true - the peer/cultural "pressure" as it were was this -

Boys are supposed to be virile and lose their virginity in their teens.s

Girls are supposed to be ladylike and wait to lose their virginity until they find the right man. The age implied is basically older, more college age.

Of course in practice it didnt happen, etc , etc.

But wouldnt these sterotype "norms" influence questions in a suvey like this? Children are impressionable, after all.

I'd agree with that. Then again, we haven't seen the original survey and the source has an axe to grind. Maybe the questions weren't quite what the article presented. Out of context, the question "How many times have you had oral sex?" seems provocative, but it makes more sense if, for example, it follows the question, "Have you ever had oral sex? If no, skip to the next section."

I'm not saying the survey is structured that way. I don't know. But that would make more sense to me than what we saw in isolation.

Now that is just lam. If your kid is so week like that then you have not done a very good job raising them have you?

If I had kids I'd probably be the one to introduce them to pot Anyway, we're talking about very young kids here. They're not likely to be semantic geniuses.