9th Circuit Decision Regarding Children and Sex

[BCPVP]

How do any parents here feel about this?
The story is from the WND (for those who need to screen their info). Here's the opinion on the case. I've only briefly read the opinion, but it seems incredible...

[BCPVP]

I'm not even sure if it's the court that I disagree with. I think the school definitely has some splainin' to do. The method with which they snuck this in seems underhanded to say the least. On the consent form, if they'd said: "The goal of this assessment is to establish a community baseline measure of children’s exposure to early trauma (for example, sex)." (as opposed to violence) I don't think near as many parents would have consented.

So...why not a poll?

[mmcd]

Refreshingly enough, you're consistant in your logic between this thread and the other one. I was expecting you to tear into the court here.

As for what the school did, I think it was clearly wrong in the case of the 1st and 3rd graders, but not as bad for the 5th graders. I can't remember that far back with any degree of certainty, but I think it was probably around 5th grade when my elementary school had it's first sex education classes (they didn't hand out condoms or anything like that) and I don't think there is anything wrong with broaching the subject of sex with kids that age as this is around when puberty starts, but I think with the 1st and 3rd graders perhaps a redacted version of the survey should have been given. I can imagine the uncomfortable dinner table conversations that followed, "So, what did you do at school today?"

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Refreshingly enough, you're consistant in your logic between this thread and the other one. I was expecting you to tear into the court here.

[/ QUOTE ]
To tell you the truth, tearing into the decision was my gut reaction. But then I thought about it a little and decided that this was one of those things I'd prefer the courts stay out of because they would have to make such a decision. But I do try to stay consistent.

[ QUOTE ]
As for what the school did, I think it was clearly wrong in the case of the 1st and 3rd graders, but not as bad for the 5th graders.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sort of my feeling as well. 5-6th grade was about when I got "The Talk". But I think how the school got this through is the real outrage. The school was not very upfront about what would be discussed in the survey and I can understand the parents' outrage. If anything, maybe it will encourage a little more attention during PTA/school board meetings/elections, which I suppose is a good thing.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
But then I thought about it a little and decided that this was one of those things I'd prefer the courts stay out of because they would have to make such a decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not yet read the decision (I will later) but at first blush it appears that the court said that it is not upto them to get in the middle of the debate that is should be upto the community.

The parents have no fundamental right to prevent schools from doing this (according to the linked articles -- not the, yet unread, opinion) so the community must decide if the community based school should be acting along these lines.

If this is the thrust of the opinion then the opinion may have been a reasonable one.

[BCPVP]

That's pretty accurate. The court said the parents do not have a right to *exclusive* control over the child's education. While the parents do have the right to choose where their kids go to school, once they choose public school, they do not have the right to dictate what the school may and may not teach their child. So a parent can't say "Don't teach my son math, it offends me." because a school can't function if it has to have unique curriculums for every kid.

I think the ruling was reasonable and deferred the judgement about what should be taught back to the school. Which is a conservative ideal, so I'm surpised at some conservative's reactions.

[jt1]

I believe that schools should abide by the morals and principles of the community in which they reside. Let the parents of that school district decide what is appropriate and leave it out of the courts.

What if a school conducted a survey about how often kids think about watching TV? Should a parent have the right to sue the school over that survey? I would say no, but that parent should have the right to bring the issue up in a PTA or school board meeting, and to force a vote on the matter.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that schools should abide by the morals and principles of the community in which they reside. Let the parents of that school district decide what is appropriate and leave it out of the courts.

[/ QUOTE ]
In general, I agree.

[ QUOTE ]
What if a school conducted a survey about how often kids think about watching TV?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not even close to comparable.

[ QUOTE ]
Should a parent have the right to sue the school over that survey?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think they have the right to sue. Doesn't mean they are in the right.

[ QUOTE ]
that parent should have the right to bring the issue up in a PTA or school board meeting, and to force a vote on the matter.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. The one thing I worry about is the slippery slope. At what point does parental objection overrule the state? Or can the state "teach" children anything it wants and be free from any redress? If the state wanted to teach kids exactly how to have safe sex and had them pair up and [censored] each other, wouldn't parents have no right to object to their kids doing this under this decision? Where's the line?

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What if a school conducted a survey about how often kids think about watching TV?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is not even close to comparable.


[/ QUOTE ]


No, sex and TV aren't comparable but constitutionaly sex isn't any different from TV. This is a constitutional case and sex isn't even mentioned in that document (though it may be mentioned in federal law and/or previous precedent...i have no idea) so a jurist would have no choice but to rule that if schools can teach and ask about TV or chocolate or smelly socks then they can do the same regarding sex.

[ QUOTE ]
At what point does parental objection overrule the state? Or can the state "teach" children anything it wants and be free from any redress? If the state wanted to teach kids exactly how to have safe sex and had them pair up and [censored] each other, wouldn't parents have no right to object to their kids doing this under this decision? Where's the line?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, here, the analogy doesn't take into account that non-consenting sex is a crime. Schools cant force students to commit crimes as that would violate civil liberties.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, here, the analogy doesn't take into account that non-consenting sex is a crime. Schools cant force students to commit crimes as that would violate civil liberties.

[/ QUOTE ]
True. Instead of all the kids, the teacher asks for volunteers and gets some. Is this okay? If that's still a little iffy, how bout the teacher brings in two pornstars and has them bang on the students' desks (these are 1st graders, remember). If the school claims this is "teaching" them, I don't see how this decision does not allow a parent to object. I guess it puts a lot of pressure at the very local levels, but what redress does the parent have if the school does something like the above examples I gave?