A Step in the Right Direction!

("Regina Griggs, said the lessons for students in eighth and 10th grade are improper"--these are teenagers--should they be 20 before they are taught about sexuality????)


Gay-inclusive sex ed plan wins approval
Mont. Co. teachers may tell students that homosexuality is not an illness
by Joshua Lynsen | Jun 13, 2:54 PM

Montgomery County Public Schools officials have approved a controversial, gay-inclusive sex education program for use throughout the district this fall.


Officials with the Maryland school district also voted 6-1 Tuesday to let teachers tell students who ask that homosexuality is not a psychiatric disorder or mental illness.


“If a student asks ‘Am I mentally ill? Am I sick?’ that child deserves a response, if there is a response,” said Superintendent Jerry Weast.


Curriculum supporters praised the vote, and welcomed the added statement.


“It deals with the greatest fear that so many kids who are gay have,” said David Fishback, a PFLAG dad whose gay son once contemplated suicide. “Now that fear can be dealt with.”


Jim Kennedy of Teach the Facts, a coalition of curriculum supporters, said he’d hoped the district would incorporate other positive statements about homosexuality, such as notes that gays can live happy and successful lives.


But the social psychologist said he was relieved that teachers can now tell their students that homosexuality is not an illness, a view that previously could not be stated in class.


“This was a real breakthrough,” Kennedy said. “This was great.”


Tuesday’s vote drew criticism, though, from groups that had challenged the curriculum.


Regina Griggs, director of Parents & Friends of Gays & Ex-Gays, said the lessons for students in eighth and 10th grade are improper and the board’s decision was triggered by political concerns.


“It has nothing to do with education,” she said. “It has everything to do with politics.”


But supporters said the new curriculum gives students the information they need and is careful to refer students with unanswered questions to a trusted adult.


“This is a very, very good day for Montgomery County,” Fishback said, “and a very, very good day for Montgomery County school children.”


The curriculum, titled “Respect for Differences in Human Sexuality,” explains concepts such as sexual identity and orientation using nonjudgmental language.


Students in eighth grade are taught to recognize healthy relationships and how to define human sexuality, gender identity and other terms. Students in 10th grade receive a more robust curriculum, including an examination of topics such as coming out. It also asks students to consider the challenges a transgender student might face.


The curriculum represents the district’s second attempt in recent years to rewrite its sex education program.


An earlier rewrite triggered a courtroom showdown in 2005 when conservative groups objected to the new content. To settle the lawsuit, school officials agreed to restart the process.


The culmination of that effort came Jan. 9, when district officials approved plans to field test the new curriculum.


In response, Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum appealed to state officials, asking them to stop the scheduled field tests at schools in Bethesda, Gaithersburg, Rockville and Silver Spring.


Maryland’s schools superintendent Nancy Grasmick, in an order released March 7, allowed testing to go forward.


But she said the challenge filed by Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, PFOX and Family Leader Network must still be heard by the state board of education.


She noted that some merits of that challenge “are equally matched by the local board’s response.”


“To that end,” she wrote, “I encourage the state board to expedite this matter, if necessary, to assure that a final decision is rendered no later than the July 2007 board meeting.”


Fishback said the state review, expected to occur during a July 24–25 meeting, is unlikely to overturn Tuesday’s vote.


“The state board is going to do its review,” he said, “but I am very confident that the state board is not going to overrule the school board on this.”


A similar appeal — submitted with state officials to challenge the Montgomery County district’s plans in 2005 — was rejected.


In that case, state officials told a single appellant that her request was “not the appropriate vehicle for modifying the existing curriculum or adopting a new policy governing the teaching of curriculum, which are quasi-legislative decisions.”


Although the threat of a separate, courtroom challenge looms, Kennedy said that case would be challenged to find good footing.


“This curriculum has been so sanitized by lawyers,” he said, “that I don’t believe there is going to be an opening for a lawsuit to win.”


John Garza, an attorney representing PFOX and other groups challenging the curriculum, did not immediately respond to calls from the Blade.


School board members pledged earlier this year to fight any legal challenge filed against the curriculum. And most members affirmed Tuesday their support of the lessons.


“I happen to believe this is a civil rights issue,” said Patricia O’Neill. “I happen to believe this is a very fine curriculum that’s being implemented.”


Board member Steve Abrams, the lone dissenter in Tuesday’s vote, said he was “very sensitive” to the high legal costs associated with drafting and

defending the curriculum.


Abrams also said he opposed — on procedural grounds — the late change letting teachers tell students homosexuality is not a mental illness.


But Kennedy said the statement is properly attributed to the American Psychiatric Association and does not make the district vulnerable in court.


He noted the curriculum’s approval was a victory for district residents and gives students important new information about gay issues.


“This is definitely an important milestone,” he said. “It’s not the end of the fight, but it’s a major milestone.”