--

DRAP!'
BACRG"OONDER I ON HA1U(ETING OF AKERICAN SEX REEDUCATION
2

by
[Judith A. Reisman Ph.D., and Margaret Bocek
I

October 1989 Schoo~s started to offer sex education courses in the demonsltrated the ineffectiveness then,such courseshave 1930S.tI Decade after decade since of statistics in reducing sexual activity, unwanted pregnancies and venere~l disease among teenagers. Before the reformers mindlefssly expand school programs aimed at preventing questirns. But I doubt that they teenagE pregnancy, they ought will. ask to
i

some

hard

cited labove, Dr. Larry Cuban, Professor of Education at Stanford U~iversity3 noted that while sex education was sold to the American public as a panacea for teen pregnancy and venereal disease, tHe opposite--increased teenage pregnancy and massive venereal !disease--has always followed sex education implementatj.on. I
I

The "m~ndless reformers," CUban refers to, are documented as a small caci1re of atypical individuals who captured leadership decades agq in the field of both sex and drug education.~ reflect the goals and objectives the sexual American long Today's dYSfunctional sex and drugofconduct among revolution youth advocated by these "mindless" reformers. In 1953, Dr. Lena Levine l I
1

2 IIReJducationllis the more precise term to describe changing the sexual education accepted by society for a "new" form of sex-dalityproposed by sex "educators."

3 Larryfcuban,
I

(Phi Delta Kappan,

Vol.

68, 12/86, p. 321).

Thisfis not the place for discussion of drug reeducation.

2

of Planned Parenthood, revealed the nationwide sex reforms the "mindless" "cadre would work diligently to fulfill. Our al ternati ve solution is to be ready as educators and parents to help young people obtain sex satisfaction before marriage, we will prevent fear and quilt.1 and we must be ready to provide young boys and girls with the best contraception measures available so they will have the necessary means to achieve sexual satisfaction without having to risk possible pregnancy. 5 . By 197p, Dr. John Moneyof Johns Hopkins University (and a long time SIECUSboard member), trailblazer in the sex reform movement, was quoted as advocating pornography for school children: "Pornographic material can be also useful in the sex education of normal children, ,,6 said Dr. Money. only!with an understanding of the sex reformation movement can one exPlain the Skyrocketing rates of youthful promiscuity and resulting epidemic of juvenile pathologies among American children ...
1900 to 198.

Late 1800s:t Toward the end of the 1800s an affluent, educated group of Western Europeans united to advocate; 'sex-hygiene, population ~ , ete. I euthanasia, free-love, masturbation, homosexuality eontro17 Launched by German homosexual acti vist Magnus Hirshfeld, (Creator of the "Institute of Sexology" in 1897) the "sex-hygiene" movementwashed overseas and was marketed to the USAas a plan to end venereal disease and poverty. The 1899 National Education Associat.ion (NEA) Ear1y 1900s: demanded "moral education [on] sex-hygiene." By 1916, facing a World War Ii"venereal peril (moral] sex education" became fairly accepted. 8 i After the "moral" need for sex-hygiene, educators Lena Levine, "Psychosocial Development," Planned Parenthood News, Summer,1953, p. 10. 6 JOh* Money, cited in The Medical Tribune and Medical News, Februa:ry 24, 1970.
5

7 See ):,orna Brown, Sex Education in the Eighties, Plenum Press, NewY'ork, 1987 for "sex-hygiene" and "population control" discussion and see Claire Chambers, The SIECUS. Circle, Western Islands, Massachusetts, 1977, especiallY pp. 235n, 324 and Edgar Gregersen, Sexua1 Practices, Franklin Watts, NewYork, pp. 35-40.

8 IBID, ~Brown, pp. 4-5.

said sex education might correct ignorance of reproduction. Around the turn of the century, G. Stanley Hall discovered .that adolescent women [SiC]9 believed that they sex education.' advocated could become jregnant by kissing; he thus

19.11: The best-selling, Kinsey Reports, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male t (1948) dispensed revolutionary sexual "data." Kinsey created the field of "sexology," reeducating lawyers, educators, legislators, parents, health professionals (eg: teaching that children are sexual from birth; that masturbation, early/multipartner child and adult sex brought health and happiness; that people are normally bi/homo/heterosexual and that sodomy, pornograph'yi' bestiality, and all other sex taboos were healthy.)1 i
IMPACT OF SEPARATION OF CHURCH ANt) STATE RULING

The 1948 US Supreme Court rUling that on-campus religious instruction; violated separation of church and state12 may have had its most profound impact upon sex reeducation in the schools. Many educators, K through college, interpreted this somewhat correctly, )~s a ruling that sex reeducation should exclude any reference to religious belief and morality, unless this was to ohallenge r~ligious belief as undermining sexual expression. Thus, sex "reeduoation:" o 20S-"OS: claimed to teach religious based morality o 40s-50s: added reproduction and the dread of VD. o 50s'"!80s: rejected reliqion. and reeducated the public, espeai*lly educators and youth, in Kinseyan sexuality, -increa$ingly excising "religious" JUdea-Christian m.orals of chastity, heterosexual love, fidelity, as "misinformation," neglecting warningswith VD, stressin~ the pleasure of varied sexual expressions of "friends." 1
19508:

Kinsey'S Sexual Behavior in the Human Female

(1953) is

9 "[Sic]" marks an error in the oriqinal quote.

1981,

10

p. 56.

Davi.d Elkind, The Hurried Child, Addison-Wesley,

Mass,

11 Judith Reisman and Deborah Fink, Tqe Kinsev Child Sexuality or Child Sexual Abuse, in press.

Reports:

12 See ~ohn Whitehead in SchOOl Based Clinics, Ed., Barrett L. Mosbacke~, Crossway Books, Illinois, 1987, p. 50.

13 See ~udith Reisman, From Abstinence to AIDS: The KinseyHefner Connection, currently in press.

released. Said Elkind, "The emphasis on correcting misinformation continued well into the 1950's;" taught in home economics.
By then, the sex education curriculum had expanded to

include information about the dangers of venereal diseaS:eand pregnancy some aspects of sexual anatomy

and its functions were taught in courses on human

biology [for] junior and senior high school students" ,~- (Elkin~, p. 56).1

1960: Twelye years after Kinsey launched the American sexual revolution,; The sixth White House Conference on Children and Youth advocated: "the school curriculum include education for family life;, including sex education" (Chambers, p. 7). What did the new sex!,ducators mean by "family life," and "sex education?" e
1964: In response, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United:: States (SIECUS), emerged officially in April 1964. SIECUS has ;since been joined by "other organizations promoting sex education" including agencies of therapists, counselors, educators, researchers, "sexologists" etc. (Brown, pp. 6-7).

In the 1960'ssex education began to explore human aspects of sexuality The new courses on sex ed4cation include[d] much more than anatomy; they deal[tj with such issues as dating behavior, abortion, contraeption, homosexuality , masturbation, mental illness and the terminal stages of disease, death [and] sexUal adjustment (Elkind, pp. 56-57). 19708: Elki(nd traced
I

the

change

from the

1950's reproductive

morality tot"njW" Kinseyan objectives in the 1970s. [T]he ~ind of sex education that is controversial is not th~ benign health education [of the 50s] but a much more e;Kp1.icit and value-laden program that has been adopted [for] sexual adjustment. The new programs aim to help young people feel more comfortable in eXpres~ing the many facets of their sexuality and to enjoy 1:;heir sexuality. Because of this emphasis upon sexual ~adjustment, .the new programs sometimes seem to be condoning, if not advocating, teenage sexuality. The new sex education programs are the product of mental health Fspecialists--psychologists, social workers, and orqaniz;ations such as Planned Parenthood (Elkind, p.

57) 14

14 Recommended curricula for sex and AIDS education used in American sc~bols today are written by Planned Parenthood as well as a score o~ other Umental health organizations" including: "The National Gay Task Force; The National Coalition of Gay STD I

1980S: World renowned child psychiatrist, Dr. Bruno Bettleheim,

said of the "new" sex education:
I

Such classes are even a danger and they're implicated in the increase in teenage sex and teenage pregnancies. You cannot have sex education without saying that sex is natural and that most people find it pleasurable Sex education cannot teach respect for the integrity of ones body (Psvcholoav Today (7/81, p. 40). The jimpact of the Kinsey Reports (1948 and 1953) claiming sexual deviation as a healthful lifestyle is seen in the report Dr. Diane Ravitch's of Colombia University on "sex education." A look at several of the [sex education] textbooks now being:widely used reveals that, indeed, what parents expec~ frequently is not what their children are getting there is no such thing as right and wrong Then there are the liberated text:books. Thay prove ~hat everything is acceptable, and anything two

f1

remove;any sense of embarrassment or quilt

include every imaginable kind or sexual acti vity to (or more) people do to each other sexually is good as long as it feels good. These books are implici tly engaqed in sexual consciousness-raising; they try to
about sex,

Services; The San Francisco AIDS Foundation ("providing on-going technical support for ~;;ot;i.cus" publications such as: "The Hot n' Healthy Times"); The National Association of people With AIDS; (all cited! in: "curriculum Recommendations by the Michigan Department ;of Public Health and The Michiqan Department of Education, (1987), Lesson 1, Grades 1.1-12, Teacher Resource, p. 25) other' souroes for national curricula include SIECUS, the Kinsey Institute, The Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality, The Pacific Center AIDS Project (offering "safe-sex" information; in "fisting, rimminq, watersports, etc.); The National AIDS Network; Educational Training Research Associates (Subcontractors for "The American Alliance for Health, PE, Raecreation\ and Dance); The National Council for Self Esteem, Palo Alto,: Calif (seminars on: "nurturing with touch," '-transcendingO\U' comfort zones"). The Wall Street Journal, September 21, 1989, in ~'Gay Rights Advancing Under 13anner o-t AIDS," stated. "Another leqitimi2inq effect of the AIDS crisis is even move pervasive and comes from the "AIDS education" that is now being conducted in the schools, on college Campuses and in the mass media." . Dr. Diane Ravitch, 12/13/82, p. 17. "The New Sex Education, at 6 The New

15

Leader,

and to demonstrate that once actually auite commonplace." BBTTLEHBIK SAYS CLASSROOM

rorbidden

activities

are

SEX EDUCATION

"IMPOSSIBLE" of what is

Dr. Bettleheim argues against any teaching commonly called: "sex education." He says:
:'r-:

In my, opinion, sex education is impossible in the classr,oom. Sex education a continuous process an~ begins the moment you are born How you feel about sex comes from watching how your parents live together, how they enjoy each other's company, the respect they have for each other. Not from what they do in bed to each other.

is

it

When . asked whether sex information cleared up children's distorted ideas about sexuality, child therapi$t Bruno Bettleheim replied: "No, because current information about sex does not do away with incorrect information New information is just grafted onto the misinformation and leads to greater confusion." (psvcholoqy TodaY. 7/81, p. 38) WHAT ARB STATED SEX REEDUCATZON GOALS?2 The US Department of Health Education and Welfare, Center for DiseasejControl, gave a large contract to a think-tank called Mathtech, Inc., to conduct the definitive survey of sex education courses in us schools, K-12. These goals are generally unknown to parents. The report: "An Analysis of U.S. Sex ,Education Programs and Evaluation Methods," describes the goals of U.S. sex education: The goals of sex education are much more ambi tiou$; they involve the changing of attitudes and behaviors (and] will, of course, conflict with 'the belief held by some people that sex Should be enjoyed only within ... context of marriage Thus, policymakers the in sex should; realize that some values conveyed education classes are not supported by all members of society [inclUding) a reduction of sexual guilt [and] an acceptance of alternative lifestyles." Political economist, Dr. Jacqueline Kasun, director of a Humboldt St4te University study found that before sex education programs began in California in 1960 there had been a decline in adolescent preqnancy. The adoption of sex education courses in

California

proceeded

increased

teen pregnancy

rates.16

'mE ItESUL'tS
NATIONAL
12-22%

SEX REEDUCATION
CALX.BD

STAT:ISTICS

OJ' YOUTH

"HBHTALLY ILL"

The most revealing national "sex reeducation" statistic may be that 12 \ to 22 percent of our youth were "mentally ill." The washington Post (June 7, 1989) reported an xnstitute of Medicine study Claiming: "As many as 14 million American children suffer from some mental disorder." Funds were requested to study the \child mental illness epidemic, especially since, "The likelihood is that the rate is increasing." Sex reeducators insist that sex education is a direct codependent of mental health. Accepting their claim, one can only conclude that sex reeduction has produced a current pandemic rate of juvenile "mental illness." It is imperative that we investigate the impact on teenage promiscuity and abortion on the rate of "mental illness;;"of American girls.
HEASVRBHBNTS 65% OF ALL SEXUALLY ACTIVE OF PBRJrORKANCB YOU'l'Jl HAD
SEX !t:tEDVCA1'ION

from the Planned Parenthood, This poll examined the rate of sexual activitv amon~ those who had comprehensive (Kinseyan) FLE/sex Education compared to those with little or no courses in the new, contraceptive, sexuality.17 out of 100% of those teens who angagadin sexual intercourse:

The

following

cites

are taken

1986 Harris poll of 1,000 teenagers.

o o o

46% had comprehensive sex education 19% had 'basic' sex education
34% had no sex education

The Harris figures provided by Planned Parenthood reveal that 65% (rounded) of sexually active school children had been given some school sex reeducation. A 31% increase (from 34% "no" sex-ed to 65% "yes" sex-ed) is statistically significant. This is one 'measurement of the performance' of teen sex reeducation when taught unde~ the rubric of separation of church and state, with
16 .;racqueline Kasun, 'Teen Pregnancy: What comparisons Among states and Countries Show," Humbol t State Uni versi ty , 1986., p. 6. See also," Washinqton Times, July 30, 1987. '7

~~rican Teens BReak: Sex. Mvths. TV. and Birth Control,

Parenthood Poll, 1986, (Table 5-4, p. 53).

The Planned

no moral or religious absolutes permitted dialogue. Based on the Planned parenthood statistics of sexual activity--following sex reeducation--one would need to question whether sex reeducation goals are being achieved? If delayed sexuality for the physical and emotional health of children is a educative goal, the higher rate of sexual activity proves the failure of sex reeducation. However, as in the 1953 statement by DZ:_~_ Levine which introduced this paper, reduced teenage promiscuity;and pregnancy is not a Planned Parenthood goal: On the)basis of ample empirical evidence, school shared sex ed programs will not decrease illicit pregnancy rates. 18 planned Parenthood goals are neither sexual abstinence nor delayed child sexual activity. Planned Parenthood, rather, joins with other "mental health professionals" in Kinseyan sex reeducationqoals. Even sex educators report that girls who "have previously taken a sex education course are somewhat more likely than those who have not to initiate sexual activity at 1 ages 15 and6 19 .A~tONWXDE SEX REEDUCATION STATISTICS School)sex reeducation has been operative since the 505.20 Former Secretary of Education, William Bennett, cited below, concludes that if sex education ~our$eS have failed, as he suggests they have , then them be gone from the presence of our children" (p. 169).

let

1971) ..
19

18

Phillip5 Cutright, Family

p::J-anning

Perspectives

(January

Press, Arlington,

Robert H. Ruff, Aborting Planned Parenthood, New Vision

Texas, 1988, p. 46, citihg:

Alan Guttmachar

InstitutQ, William Marsiglia and Frank L. Matt, "The Impact at Sex Education on Sexual Activity , Contraceptive Use and Premarital Pregnancy Among American Teenagers," Familv Plannimt Perspectives, 18:4 .
zo Th~ tact that r~cord-keepinq and sex curricula have both been hidden, require that anecdotal comments by sex educators, school board members, teacher6 and admini6trators throughout the nat.ion be pooled to pAq the starting datQs for sex courses. National information confirms sex reeducation findings that certain scbool districts in Virginia and the schools in Washington DC (see Paula Barry, Supervisory Director for Health Education and services, waShington DC schools) were targeted for early sex r~education programs. starting date lor targeted PC programs was pegged at 1953, and virginia in the early-mid 60s.

1960-1980: 1970-1984: 1976: 1985: 1987: 1987: 1987:

200% increase Teen abortion

in "Unwed teenage rate doubled

births.,,21

60% of nation's high school seniors had taken sex-ed 70% of nation's high school seniors had taken sex-ed 50% + nation's youth had coitus by age seventeen. 400,000 + teen girlS annually abort 40% of our 14-year-olds will be pregnant by age 19 1971 - 1981

Teen pregnancy Teen abortions

rate up 48% 1971--to up 133% from 1971-to

1981 (to 1.15 mill yr.) 1981~ STATISTICS

WASHZNGTON, o o o o o o o

D.C., SEX RBEDUCATION

School: sex reeducation -- operative since 1953. School~based clinic inaugurated about 1976 Teen birth up -7% from 1983 to 1987a Teen infant mortality up -~3% ~983 to 1987 Teen pregnancy reported down 1984 to 198724 Taen abortion -a fourth above birth 1986 & 1987 10 to 14-year-014 pregnancy up -35% 1985 to 1987

Al though there is a strong pattern of undel"reporting of pregnancy and abortion, the failure of sex reeduction is seeh in the increase of pregnancy among children under 15 years. No data
21 See William Bennett, for all statistics cited measurement"

School Based Clinics, in this national

pp. 158-159 performanoe

~ D~ta c;;:ited The Blumenfeld Educa:t;;~pn Letter, Boise, Idaho, 2/88: Dr. Dinah Richard, "Teenage Pregnancy and Sex Education in the Schoo1s--What Works and What Does Not Work," San Antonio: crisis Pregnancy Centers, 1986, pp. 1-9.
~ Data taken from the Of rice or Maternal and Child Health, Department of "Fact Sheet, Infant Mortality Teenage Pregnancy, Human Services (no page number provided--births by Wards). Live births increased by rougnly 600 babies, 9,524 in 1983 to 10,178 in 1987. Th~ teenage infant mortality rate is reported by this DoH study as increased by 13% from 1983 to 1987.

in

representative noted that teen abortion rates are now severely

lIunderreported"

24 Data taken from "Reported pregnancy and Pregnancy Rates in DC, 1984-1987, Research and statistics Division, Office of Policy and Management, DC Department of Human Services," Table The rate of'teen activity rerers to "reports" among youth 15 to 19 years as well as to children under 15 years. The DC

t.

by hospital$

and doctors.

10

is available on abortion among this age chi1d.

ENERGETIC, WELL INTENTIONED EDUCATORS

In conversation with Dr. Reisman, 9/14/89, energetic and dedicated 'Supervising Director of Health and Education and Services for Washington DC, Ms. Pau1a Barry stated: "Sex education . began in the early 1960fs Decision-makinq skills values clarification" have all been part of "sex education" 'indistrict schools for "decades." "Children are given information and taught to make their own decisions. They are not told what to do." The WillJte's25report on Washington DC's attempt in the late 70s, to dispense birth control to Woodson High School girls, marked the, birth of a nationwide school-based clinic movement. The Clinic ifollowed on the heels of nearly two decades of prior
sex education in Washington DC. SEPT8MBBa 1t58 S.X RSEDUCATXON BBG&H paR D%STRZCT ~OnTH

The brochure, "public Scbools 0. the District of Columbia curriculum in health and family life education, Kindergarten -- Grade 12, 1961-1962," states that the family life education program "has beE!n an integral part afthe curriculum of eleven pilot schools since September 1958. In the fall of 1.959, the numb~r of pilot schools was increased to forty-one. An additional thirty-one schools were added in september of 1960." What was
taught to these vulnerable youth?

+n ~h~ 1961 DC brochure. texts bv SIECUS official and Sexolocrv board member I Lester Kirkendall were recommended more often than :the texts of any other- Ueducator" fie: Fin<ti,ng out About Ourselves. 1956, Understandin9 the other sex, 1955, Datinq Davs, 1948). several other recommended DC school d!stri~t a~thors

appear also to be early STEens member$ and educators.

Long-time Washington, D.C. Family Life Educator, Paula Barry, kindly provided these early documents on sex education in the district. M$. Barry pointed out that the FLE program also taught about "aloohol, tobacco, drugs, narcotics" in grade5 4-6, The Sunday star, a derunct Washington D.C. newspaper, asked in 1969, "Sex: Wh.i: Are The Schools Ttlac:::hing?"It was noted that "nearly 1.0years ago the schoo1 board banned discussion of contraception and sexual intercourse."

reported
2S

Despite the expressed wi]'l of the elected board, the star

("Sex Education Fi~ms Candid, Explicit:.")

Dr.

1:hat:.1:rained

&

Mrs.

J.C.

Classroomf., Hayes PUbliShing,

Willke, Sex Education--in Cincinnati, 1978, p.101.

the

11

sex educators were showing D.C. children "explicit" films with "frank and' direct" narrative of, "barnyard animals mating," recommended for "3 to lo-year-olds." By the early 60s then, reports the star, Washington D.C. school children also viewed: animated drawings, of the male ejaculation. The narrator says, "It is nature's way of passing the sperm into the female body during sexual intercourse. II Critics claimed the offending ilms--shown in the "fifth and sixth grades" or in junior high, "condone masturbation. II In the classroom, " [h]omosexuali ty , masturbation, deviant behavior and pre-marita1 sex are treated." The star says that in the late 60s Washington DC school administrators purchased a torso model "with male and female genital organs" (The sunday star, June 29, 1969) tor use in the sex reeducation process. It would appear that the mandate of DCs elected school board was circumvented by sex educators at least since the 50s.

transmission of sexua1 thA f'LE prcgram:

the

And,

Distric;:t

in its 1971 Health

of

Columbia,
facts

and Familv Life and

t.he

information

"Philosophy"

Education is not

states
the

guide

aim

that

for of

Sex Education is to be Information and can be. eduoation. [It] emphasizes

distinguished from Sex described as character attitu4e 4evelopment And

quidance related

sexes ... The creation

to

of ... atti t.udes

assooiations ~etween

is

far

more
in

the

important than the remembering of facts [ana] result desireab1e practices (p. ii, emphasis added).

An eXdmple ot'

the

1.971.

effort to train new "attitudes

in

youth may be found on page 1 an: "The Language Here the teacher explains that words such as:

or Sex Education."

penis, vaqina, sexuality, masturbation, homosexuality, and sexual intercourse should be discussed openly by the students and teachers if a wholesome attitude towardonets sexuality is to be deve1oped. Noting page 1 of the 1971 FLE guide,"nonjudgemental" FLE teachers reformed the student' 51 character--to approve a public versus private view of sex. The 1971 directive commanded t.hat the child disobey parents: .tcite examples of words tbat your parents
have repea1:ed1y 1:01d you no1: 1:0 use" (emphasis added).

Johnson,

The references for this Washinqton D.C. curriculum are almost exolusively Kinseyan--from Kinsey's 1948 and 1953 R~ports to material~ by Mary Calderone, Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, Eric

Wardell

Pomeroy, John Money, Isadore

12

Rubin,

Alberi:

Ellis, and the like. Kinsey is repeatedly cited and his fallacious "data on homosexuality (p. 27) and masturbation (p. 20) are quoted1 to support the normality and harmlessness of both activities. Subsequent FLE guides have built on this grounding. The succe~s of these character changes in youthful sexual attitudes may be seen in the current data suggesting that well over one-half of all black children are born out-of-wedlock in W~~pington,j DC, while in 1987 51.4 percent were living in single parent homes. 26 The star cites school districts surrounding DC: An outline- for a kindergarten-through-12th grade sex education curricula in Prince George County is designed for us~ by teachers who have taken a special in-service trainina course and in schools that are determined to have the right climate for accepting the courses. Beginninq in kindergarten and first arade the emphasis is on _aking children aware that 'sex can be discussed openly; in the classroom the proper names for the genital organs are learned miscarriage, abortion and illegitimate pregnany may be brought up (emphasis added) 1986 VIRGINIA SEX REEDUCATION STATISTICS
SOHMARY

HI:GHES'f TEEN PREGNANCY 1986:

an~ cities in virqinia,

Out

of

over

136

independent
rates

counties

the h~qhest

teen pregnancy

were in districts that have been intensive sex reeducation targets since the 1960s: 1) Petersburg, 2) Alexandria, 3) Falls Church (Virginia Vital Statistics, Virginia Department of Health Statistics, 1986, Teen Pregnancy Rates; Table 3, pp. 16-17).

LOWEST. ~BEN PREGNAIiICY 1'86:

out or over
Buena vista and

136

independent

counties an4 cities in Virginia, the lowest teen pregnancy rates were in districts that had Dot offered FLE or comprehensive sex

ree4ucatioD: 1) Harrisonburg, 1986 ALEntmRXA, o o o

2)

3)

Bristol.

VXRGXNXA, SEX UBDUCATXOIf 8'l'A'l':IS'l'J:CS

Sex reeducation -- Operative since the 60s. Teen pregnancy rate up 35% from 1985--to 1986 Teen abortions up 50% from 1985 to 1986

The ~lack Child Advocate, Special Report: The status of BlaCk Children. Vol. 15, NO.4, Winter 1989, p. 3. See also The Washington Post, "Where Children Become Parents, n January 26, 1986, p. Al pnd A 2.
13

Alexandria had the highest pregnancy and abortion increases in virginia. 27 Alexandria's curriculum has been called the prototype from which the state's "Standards Of Learning" (SOL) were modeled. The followinq statement on the qoals of Alexandria health specialists should be seen in light of the increase in teen sex ac~ivity, preqnancy and abortion; The pqrpose of sex education is to make students more .'r- "accepting of different sexual choices differences in sexual partners different sexual lifestyles.o We don't try to instill one set of values" (statement by an Alexandria public school health curriculum specialist to past Arlington County school board member~ Margaret Bocek, 4/88). By not!trying to "instill one set of values," Alexandria has been training the "character" and "attitudes" of its youthful charges. According to Adelard Brault, State Board of Education member and Education Department specialist: "comprehensive, K 12 sex education, in the Alexandria school system, had 'no eff~ct teen pregnancy.' (Barbee, Concerned Citizens on reducing Counsel, Press release, 11/17/87). PALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA, o o o SEX REEDUCATION STATISTICS

Sex reeducation -- operational since the 60$. Teen pregnancy rate up 50% from 1985 to 1986 Teen abortions up 50% from 1985 ~~ 1986

of 136 Virginia counties and cities, Falls Church had the third highest teen pregnancy rate in Virginia~ (Virginia Department of Health, Vital statistics, 1986, Table 3). Falls ... Church
homogenous oommunity

is

an

affluent,

predominantly

white,

where comprehensive

sex reeducation has been

taught for roughly two d$cade$- It is the home of sex educator and premier~ teacher-trainer and curricul~ consultant, Mary tee Tatum. Tatum began Officially teaChing sex reeducation as ~art Her of "Health Education" in the Falls Church schools in 1974. 8 seX r~u;1(:tucation is reflected in an August 1989 ETR conference in San Francisco. Here, training other sex reeducators, Tatum said: IITelling people to say no to sex and drugs is like telling a

27

(Tab~e 3:

Virginia

Department

of

Health

Statistics,

1986).
28 Statement to Margaret Bocek by Falls Church Public Schools Info~ation offioer in their Information Office, 9/14/89~

14

manic depr~ssive

to have a nice day." ~ SAKE AS 1964

1'79 VXltGXNXA SBX ltBEDUCATXON HB

Dr. Rhoda Lorand, clinical psychologist and child health specialist,i stated that the "Family Life Education Curriculum Guidelines !of the state of virginia" were the same in 1.979 as "1?~~oughtt~ my attention since the advent of SIECUS in 1964." Loran~ warned that virgini~'s FLE 1964/1979- program undermined! parental authority, assaulted the JUdea-Christian! ethic, pro~ided children with anxiety-ridden sex misinformation,! and omitted all references to the negative consequences of! juvenile sex activity (eg, venereal diseases and for girls: early! cervical cancer, pelvic inflammatory disease, possible sterility, I etc). (Letter to Mrs. Carolyn J. Reas, CAUSE, February 17, 1979).; And, Walter Barbee's 12/7/87 (concerned citizens Counsel) letter! ! to Dr. Lemmon, President, Virginia Board of Eduoation nQtest of the high teen pregnancy areas which have been s~ reeducation, have had "teen pregnancy rates 3 to 7 times highe~ than the rates for many areas in Virginia that have had littlQ b~ no sex education. Many

tei;iching

Again,! addressing virginiaig sex reeducation goals, virqinia iof Health Education supervisor and architect of the Virginia FLE (sex reeducation curriculum) Jeane Bentley, reported to the su:Ef6lk Family Life Education StUdy Commi tte.e;

Department

There

iis no stated goal to becau$" we are not sure that

stated: goa,l to reduce sexually transmitted diseases,

reduce teen pregnancy, it will ....There is no

because we're not sure that it will (Virginia Concerned Citize*'s council PreSs release, November 17, 1987). Barbee!confirmed He
cert.ifi~d that Jim Bailey, testified t.o t.he Virginia Joint

that the sex reeducation goals had changed. virginia Department of Health,

Teen Pregnancy St.udy Co~i~tee in 1987, "'Werre not sure that Family Life Education alone is going

to reduce teen pregnancy.' He revealed the next step: school based clinics," (Barbee's letter to Dr. Lemmon). The goals are early contr4ceptive information for "safe-sex" and abortion. The Virginia Board of Education's sex education compon~nt is not a value-oriented, abstinence program. Ratherj it is a Safe Sex program, which our findings indicate will not reduce teen pregnancy, and may, in fact, iexacerbate the problem (The Report by the

participant

29

B.ased
.j

on

transcript
15

provided

by

ETR conference

Virginia Legislative Joint Subcommittee studying Teen Pregnancy Prevention, January 1988). virqinia's sex education consultant, Jacqueline Sowers, speaking at the state funded FLE training workshop, defined "family" as "people you choose to live with as an adult in an intimate way." Asked if two homosexuals living together, were a family, she responded, "yes (Virginia Family Life Education, Training Workshop in Norfolk, July 21-22, 1988). Further, The Washington Gay Blade, a homosexual newspaper quoted JohnWidener, member of the Arlington Public Schools Health curriculum Committee, saying that leaders of the Alexandria Gay community, the Arlington Gay Allience, and . Parents and Friends of Gay Men and Lesbians were "working behind the scenes to shape the Virginia Family Life curriculum." (October 9, 1987) When The Wall street Journal wrote of "Gay Rights Advancing Under Banner of AIDS" (September 21, 1989), noting mass media was carryinq the "gay rights" message, coast to coast, TWSJ hardly imagined todayls reality, when homosexual organizations solicit youthful members in high school newspaper ads. Said TWSJ, as homosexuality becomes accepted, the "credit must go to AIDS. II
CONCLUSZOII

This backqrounder on the marketing of sex reeducation to the American people has provided a brief historical glance at US sex reeducation as well as some basic statistics on teenage sexuality nationwide, in Washington DC and in Northern Virginia. Both Washington DC and Northern Virginia were early sex reeducation sites, with:Washington DC launching one of the first school basQd clinics in the nation.

Sold to the American public as a cure for teen pregnancy

and venereal diseasQ, ":mindless" sex reformers began teaching dysfunctional sex conduct to American youth by the 50s. Favored by the 1948 US Supreme court ruling restrioting religious instruction 'in schools, Dr. Lena Levine's 1953 Planned Parenthood cadre havelonq succeeded in their aim to "help young people obtain sex before marriage. n The transition from religiously informE~dmora.l sex education was so successful that by 1970 Dr.

John

chi lc1ren .

Money" was

proposing

pornography

for

unorma.l"

school.

Under the rubric of separation of church ana state, religious mQral authority was excluded from the educational procese~, by default removing sexuality education from those who had taught from a religious perspective to those who excised and
ridiculed re(]"iq,iQ\ls exual s codes. 50S

Sex re~ducat!on rom the

to the

BOs.

h.;.s

lead not to

16

lower rates of youthful sexual dysfunction but rather to higher rates of dysfunction across all "measurements of performance." Juvenile mental health as well as physical and sexual health has deteriorated in every measurement of well-being historically identified by our society. Most telling are recent unprecedented numbers of. juvenile sex offenders who assault the elderly and younger ch~ldren as well as well as the increased incidence of juvenile suicide and accidental masturbatory death.30 Since, to my knowledge there has been no attempt 'to study the rate of mental illness (and suicide, runaway attempts and other dysfunctions) by young girls who have undergone abortions, these potentially ominous data are still forthcoming. On the evidence, as other states have followed the Washington DC FLE model since ~958, the nation finds teenage sexuality increasingly resembling that of youngsters in the District of Columbia where committed FLE teachers and the cadre of sex reeducators soberly and successfully changed the religious "character" .of children and their sexual "attitudes.I' The call
of Dra. Bettleheim, Bennett and others, that "sex "education" is

"impossible" and must "be gone from the presence of our children" may well be the enlightened clarion call of the Future.

30 See Reisman:

Abstinence

to AIDS,

on the discussion

of up

to 1000 persons, mostly young boys, who die annually due to "autoerotic. asphyxiation" (masturbatory death). See FBI and
Hetropo11tan;Lite !nsurance aata, New YQrR Times, ~/27/g4.

17

5 5 . .' 6 ,. 4 8, 8 6, .,. .). 99, dr~wings

.. . -; j . j

.. 10 .:..SWEDEN? .. 4, 4. , 15 1955 3 3, 77, .. Parenthood 82-18.. 15-17 311 f health 212 OF 17 of !N on .. 14 14, -6, . 6, .; 11, - 5, : 17 .. 15, . 118 ;-...;.)-5,House.. Iji:Conference -7, 12, .. .! . -j 4, 1, 1,2, pregnancy ; 4..Childrentudy .. 16 10 16 1 7-18 17 14 XWHAT andi BMedicine I D2,tQ . s Inc. SEX 12 13 .. Youth 16, 1987 12, 5, 10, 9, 8, 3, REEDUCA1'10N 13, 11-13, -1 17, 12, 11, 6, 12-14,

7,

---

.- ~-~--.,,--

-~

sadism,. even bestiality--as though these were natural. proper experiJIl1ents in sensuality. This has been called flselective propagcmda, teaching children dysfunctional sex conduct while n withholding data on the physical and emotional harms resul tinq from nnproper use of ones reproductive organs.

20