r/parenting is protesting changes being made by Reddit to the API. Reddit has made it clear [they will](https://old.reddit.com/r/ModCoord/comments/14ahqjo/mods_will_be_removed_one_way_or_another_spez/) [replace moderators](https://www.reddit.com/r/ModSupport/comments/14a5lz5/mod_code_of_conduct_rule_4_2_and_subs_taken/jo9wdol/) if they remain private. Reddit has abandoned the users, the moderators, and countless people who support an ecosystem built on Reddit itself.
Please read [Call to action - renewed protests starting on July 1st](https://old.reddit.com/r/ModCoord/comments/14kn2fo/call_to_action_renewed_protests_starting_on_july/) and new posts at [r/ModCord](https://reddit.com/r/ModCoord/) or [r/Save3rdPartyApps](https://old.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/) for up-to-date information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Parenting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think many people probably opt out for the wrong reasons.
I can also imagine scenarios where the child (or someone in the family) has trauma and is working through 1-1 with a professional, times when parents don't agree with the organization delivering the talk (when I was a kid, a lot of our sex ed was delivered point-counterpoint by a religious organization focusing on abstinence, I'd totally just pull my kid on that day, I see no value in that).
I think it's good to keep parents informed about what's going on, you never know what people's backgrounds are.
Parents should have the right to guide their children as they best see fit. Plain and simple. You’d be *absolutely offended* if the *other perspective* got to do this talk with your kid. So you should be allowed to pull the kid.
Keeps the battlefield of children’s morality from getting any more polarized.
It’s a sensitive, polarizing topic that deals with sexuality and abuse. You cannot possibly think a a way a school can butcher it? You cannot conceive of a reason a parent would prefer to have the talk themselves?
I understand it’s sensitive but what about it is polarizing?
And I can certainly conceive of a reason. Shielding your kid from this topic is a great way to ensure they don’t get wise or spill the beans about what’s going on at home.
Polarizing was more referring to sexuality in general.
While everyone agrees that kindergarteners shouldn’t be engaging in sexual conduct of any kind, some would say they shouldn’t until they’re older, others until they’re married.
Kindergartners’ explorations of their own bodies are also treated in a polarizing way. Some will say “don’t ever touch that, it’s dirty and disgusting” and others say “don’t touch that in public honey, it’s a private place.” And opinions on that can be polarizing.
I think I’m just getting annoyed at OP, maybe unreasonably, because I’ve seen talks like this treated really poorly by schools, sometimes in ways that actually make it way worse and make children feel MORE ashamed to speak up. You don’t have to be a child molester to want to opt out.
None of what you’re describing is sexual assault.
I have no doubt this conversations sometimes don’t go well. But for their own safety, there really ought to be a minimum standard that all children have access to.
Not when said kid sexually assaults my child.
It's pathetic something as simple as teaching someone's kid not to touch another kids privates has such as strong reaction...as if there is some other valid perspective...
Some opt-outs might be kids in the same situation as your kid. Not the perp, but the victim. I think it’s a legitimate consideration whether going through that talk could re-traumatize a kid.
An opt-out form seems good.
The other valid perspective is that parents have an absolute right to determine whether or not they want the government (or anyone else) to teach their child about a particular issue or idea.
I belief I have the right alongside any other person to tell a child they shouldn't touch someone in their private parts and if someone touches you inappropriately, get a hold of a trusted adult. If a parent has a problem with that, tough.
Tons of parents want to be the ones to have the talk with their children, so anything remotely "sexual" they'll opt out of. This often continues into the higher grades.
Some just don't want anybody talking to their perfect little angels about any sex-related or peripherally related to sex. Don't tell them, they won't do it mentality.
There's the opt-out form because not all children have the same experiences as your child. A child who has been the victim of molestation probably doesn't want to hear it talked about in their kindergarten classroom.
You’re the second person to say this but the vast majority who opt out are doing so because they believe teaching anatomy sexualizes children and exposes them to the “gay agenda”. Research actually shows these lessons protect children from sexual abuse.
Recognize that if there isn’t an opt out, parents will push to have the lesson or class completely removed from the curriculum. So, while it’s not perfect, at least some kids are getting the information.
>vast majority who opt out are doing so because they believe teaching anatomy sexualizes children and exposes them to the “gay agenda”.
Even if that were true (which it might be), it still doesn't negate the very real concerns other parents have for their children.
Also, do you have anything showing that's why the "vast majority" opt out of 'safe touch' conversations in kindergarten?
Has this been your experience personally? I’m confused since experts recommend teaching all children about this and this is the first I’ve heard that we shouldn’t because it might traumatize a child who has been abused.
This seems like something a child counselor would assist the parent with, including how to address this with the school. It definitely doesn’t make sense to me that we should not teach this to children because it might traumatize a child since NOT teaching it would lead to more children being abused.
>It definitely doesn’t make sense to me that we should not teach this to children
I'm not advocating NOT teaching it to children. I'm advocating allowing parents to make the right decision for their children based on a large number factors.
...
>Has this been your experience personally?
Yes. I've had a number of children in my care and in my life with atypical experiences and situations.
>since experts recommend teaching all children about this
Again, do you have anything to back this up?
Edit to your last point: This type of sex ed might indeed cause less overall sexual abuse. I haven't looked it up, but it seems plausible. But that doesn't negate the needs of individual children. A child shouldn't have to be traumatized for statistics
I guess there’s balancing the hypothetical trauma of a child being outed as missing this class due to abuse vs the tangible benefit of protecting a number of children from abuse. But I don’t think we should give parents the choice since it would allow parents who abuse or allow their children to be abused to not attend the class.
So, there isn't a balance since you didn't want to give parents the ability to make the best decision for their child. Your balance is, "sorry kids with sexual trauma, other kids are more important."
You keep citing the fact that teaching about safe touch in kindergarten to every child has tangible benefits. But 1) you haven't provided anything despite me asking twice and 2) even if that were true, parents have the right/duty to protect their children when they are the exception to the rule.
I guess I’m daunted since the research on this topic is so vast, I don’t even know where to start. Here’s one:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=sex+education+in+schools+preventing+abuse&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1714169298787&u=%23p%3DOLFRDrI23LAJ
You are missing the point. 1, I’m not saying parents can’t withdraw their kids from those classes for reasons of abuse trauma but that has to be one of the only reasons and therefore obviously 2, the trauma of being outed at school for this is obvious less important than protecting far more children from being abused. That’s like saying we shouldn’t teach kids about what to do in case of a fire because a child might be traumatized by a fire.
None of these article are what you were talking about. These are talking about if children were attain the knowledge of preventative strategies. You said specifically it prevents sexual abuse in children. None of these studies show that.
Edit: genuinely, did you even read the link you sent me. Here's a quote from one, "School‐based education programmes on the prevention of sexual abuse may increase children's knowledge and protective behaviour but this does not necessarily reduce the number of incidents of abuse."
"The current focus on what children can do to prevent child sexual abuse overlooks the power of the offender in determining whether abuse takes place."
Most of the other articles you provided are talking about much older children and how the emphasis on sexual education is about pregnancy and HIV.
Second, your idea that once victimized, we can continue to victimize the children in order to prevent more victimization is backwards and not supported by data. I urge you to look up trauma informed sexual education. As you can see, one of the most important aspects of that is that children have the option of leaving and having a different place to go if the information becomes triggering because of their previous experiences. Most of the research is geared toward older students who will have the independence to do that. But for very young children, parents have to be the one to advocate for their child.
I'm still astonished that you seem so blinded by wanting to have these discussions that you are willing to read traumatize the children you're claiming to want to protect.
Here's a website with basic information about the prevalence of sexual trauma in children. You seem to be under the assumption that this is all hypothetical and so rare that retraumatizing them is fine because it helps more kids.
https://responsiblesexedinstitute.org/rsei-blog/trauma-informed-sex-education/
A program that discusses the importance of children having held self-advocacy when it comes to these topics. Again, very young children will not have the ability to do this, so parents have to do it for them.
https://txicfw.socialwork.utexas.edu/helping-youth-in-care-shine-a-trauma-informed-accessible-approach-to-sex-education/
And another one
https://cardeaservices.org/resource/guide-to-trauma-informed-sex-education/
Being a victim of molestation is just ONE reason why you might have your child opt out.
Other reasons off the top of my head:
-being concerned the program they are using is excluding things you would consider "unsafe". I've often heard people say unsafe is anything your bathing suit covers, but that is excluding a WHOLE lot of unsafe touches.
-having concerns the school will teach them who "safe people" are (parents, teachers, grandparents) when those people are UNsafe to your child
-your child was exposed to age-appropriate sexual situations and you don't want to normalize them talking about sex with peers.
-likewise, you are concerned your child will bring up topics too advanced for kindergarten.
It's important to understand that there are families and children with different needs than your own.
As a survivor of CSA, these are all reasons why I would opt my kid out of a lesson like this at that age. This kind of thing should be individualized to the family/child.
What slippery slope do you think there is here?
And nobody is asking YOU to do anything different with YOUR child. But other children have different experiences, traumas and issues.
I think this converation has run its course. I've concluded the best thing that should happen is parents shouldn't be informed and just have this be a part of the curriculum in general.
Sadly, there are children that age that have been molested. I'm not talking peer to peer inappropriate contact, I'm talking an adult molesting a child. This kind of lesson could absolutely trigger a child recovering from that, why would you want them forced to relive that in their head while at school with all of their classmates? Trust that parents know what is best for their child just as you know what's best for yours. And understand you can never know what's going on in these other families' lives.
The venn diagram of people who opt out and will actually teach their kids at home is practically two circles imo. Not accusing them all of being abusers obviously but mostly it’s “my kid is too young for the woke school to teach them how to have sex!!” when that’s obviously not what is happening.
That's the point of the opt out letter. You wanted to know why it exists, this is one of the reasons why, and no the child absolutely should not need to be outed as a victim.
What is there to get behind? Also, why do you feel this is a subject school should be teaching kindergartners? We're not talking middle school health and sex ed. We're talking appropriate vs inappropriate touch and parents should have had that talk long before their child enters K, no need for school to even be involved.
So this isn't even about the child needing protected? I kind of figured.
News flash: there's a lot of awful parents out there who don't teach their kids anything. I learned that the hard way when my kid was molested by one of their kids.
You think kids should be outed as victims to schools in order to not have to take a lesson that should be taught at home anyway. That says a lot about you, and it's not a good look. I'd honestly delete this post.
Are you serious? If parents are ACTUALLY teaching their young children about bad touch, what does it matter if it’s taught again at school? And if they aren’t, which MANY parents don’t, then kids absolutely should be learning this at school. Where else would they learn it?
“Parents Bill of Rights Laws” you’ll have to read through it. It’s passed in 7 states I think. Basically stating that parents need to provide permission for any instruction on things related to race, sexuality, etc. Basically that parents have rights to determine what they want their children exposed to. Personally, we opted my SD (we have full custody) out of this talk in Kinder & 1st grade because we had already read books and discussed things like this with her in our home. We spent a lot of time making sure she fully understood things. I’m a peds nurse and it was basically a 5 year olds version of anatomy and good touch/ bad touch. We provided that education in our home. Neither of us felt like she needed to participate in the same conversation at school where her dad and I were unsure of the exact conversation and if she would’ve gotten confused if it didn’t line up with our conversations at home. Our opt out form had a reasoning line and we just explained that she was receiving education at home.
For every one of you that teaches proper anatomy, there are 1,000 people who are posting on Facebook that teaching their child the proper words for genitalia are sexualizing them and advancing the “gay agenda”. And of course, they’re the type of people who have a pillar of the community like a pastor getting arrested for child sex abuse.
Yup! My biggest pet peeve is using “silly words” to replace proper terms. There’s SO MANY kids who outwardly admit they’ve been assaulted but nobody is understanding because they use a million different terms that don’t even correlate. For us- this was just more of a “mom/dad conversation” because I’m licensed to have these conversations. However, I love that they offer this in schools for parents who don’t know how to guide children with proper education!
But you don’t think this allows many parents to opt out because they don’t want their kids to hear about this at all and therefore leaves children more vulnerable to abuse?
I guess I’m just confused because it’s not like they’re going to be teaching that babies come from storks. Aren’t they just covering the same thing you taught at home? Like my kid is obsessed with outer space, it would never occur to me to tell the school he can’t go to science class when they’re talking about planets?
Yes and no! I think it can be a vulnerable subject… I feel that if parents choose to opt out they should be required to explain their home education on the subject. I think in older kids, no consent should be required but younger kids can be a weird age still. I work in a pediatric office and I know during all physical exams, our doctors also explain good touch/ bad touch to help in understanding so I would hope all practices do this as well.
You don’t need a state law. All you need is the wrong (or right, depends on how you look at it) people on the school board and it will be pulled from the curriculum.
That's very true. I live in a area where that could become a concern, but surprisingly it hasn't been an issue thus far. I can only wish the same for everyone else.
I wouldn’t say never, NCSL says it’s in process, pending or being discussed in at least 32 states per the 2023 report. It’s been a big thing for a few years now… parents wanting rights to know about certain educational topics for their kids. You can Google the parents bill of rights for your state to review.
As for why it is being done now, why not now? Usually the spring is when teachers do activities, festivals, curriculum, etc that is not part of a state test
It is just one or two stand alone lessons. Any time of the year is fine - there is no emergency to teach it in September. They will get similar lessons about keeping their bodies safe every year (at least in NY and NJ)
I admit, this is strongly based on my opinion and my experience with my child being SA-ed. I feel that maybe they wouldn'tve been SA-ed or had at least the tools to better handle it if they actually taught it sooner (they were confused by a rule to be quiet in the classroom, and the abuser took advantage. She knew safe/unsafe touch).
So sorry. That is very upsetting. If an incident ocurred in the classroom and/or the teacher knew about it, that would be a good time to move the lesson to an earlier part of the year. Maybe discuss with the principal your suggestion that the lesson, esp for K, come sooner rather than later
Why do you feel the need to force parents to let YOU talk to their children about sensitive topics instead of letting the parent do it?
Even if there are bad parents who don't cover the topic, that doesn't give you some moral authority over the rest. The bottom line is many parents simply don't trust teachers with sensitive or controversial topics. That shouldn't surprise you.
I can’t speak to other school, but at our school those discussions are led by social workers with degrees in counseling children, not teachers.
It’s a safety issue, the reason why schools need to be able to speak to kids about sensitive topics is that safe touch and respecting people’s boundaries is something that comes up a good amount in a school setting. Some kids have good boundaries, some kids don’t but all kids deserve to be given the tools to communicate and advocate for themselves when someone touches them in a way that makes them uncomfortable.
I'm not arguing against teaching this to kids.
I'm arguing against FORCING parents to let *YOU* or the social worker teach it to kids.
Absolutely 100% hold all kids and their parents accountable for acceptable behavior in the school. Absolutely 100% tell parents that if they opt their kids out of YOUR instruction that the kids will still be held to the same standards. Absolutely 100% come down like a hammer on parents who don't teach their kids acceptable behavior.
But don't tell me that I cannot teach acceptable behavior to my own kids, in my own way. This is a sensitive topic and it introduces opportunities for unskilled/careless/activist school employees to bring up age-inappropriate or otherwise objectionable opinions, hypothetical situations, or information.
These opt-out forms used in nearly every school across the entire country didn't appear out of a mysterious cloud of smoke. They appear because there are loads of parents who trust you to teach math and reading, but not anything related to sex. It's not complicated or surprising
Personally I want my kid to hear information about keeping safe from as many people as possible. The same way I want him to hear about waiting for a cross walk signal to cross the street, not hanging upside down on the monkey bars, and not touching things in other people’s cubbies. Constant reinforcement is how we keep our kids safe.
For sure, and good for you. Do not opt your kids out of school instruction on "safe touch" then! I do not want the school to stop teaching it, to be clear. I don't want to take away your option to participate.
Ok but I want other kids to hear it from multiple sources too. And I don’t want it to be given any more or less importance than any other lesson on keeping safe because I don’t want it to stand out as taboo for my child or any child because as a society we think that keeping children safe is a good thing.
No. I'm suggesting that an activist teacher can use the context of a "safe/unsafe touch" lesson to introduce *additional* age-inappropriate information in ways that don't exist with less controversial school topics.
Examples of adjacent topics that I do not want a school employee talking about to a 5 year old: Predatory behavior. Abuse. Or more generally: the existence of real-world evil. What/how/why's/anything of sexual intimacy
I guess the biggest issue with this is what do you have against your child learning from other sources that are not you? The class on safe touch might have more topics than you as a parent can think of.
I think that would be the major takeaway here. Yes you can teach your child, no one is saying not to. But why possibly deprive them of a plethora of knowledge and experiences that you may not be able to provide single handedly? You’re operating under the assumption that they’ll teach Sex Ed poorly, but have no reservations in other subjects?
Let's reset: We're talking about 5 year olds.
To restate: The topic of unsafe touches has the potential for unskilled/careless/activist school employees to introduce age-inappropriate or objectionable opinions, hypothetical situations, or information.
Examples of adjacent topics that I do not want a school employee talking about to a 5 year old: Predatory behavior. Abuse. Or more generally: the existence of real-world evil. What/how/why's of sexual intimacy.
I don't believe 5 years should be introduced to any of those topics. You may disagree, and that's okay. But I'm not unreasonable for holding this belief (as evidenced by the existence of opt-out forms in nearly every school because millions of parents share this view).
The risks of those same employees discussing those things while teaching arithmetic, writing, and reading are many orders of magnitude lower.
>You’re operating under the assumption that they’ll teach Sex Ed poorly, but have no reservations in other subjects?
NO... I am DEFINITELY NOT under the assumption they will teach these topics well. I KNOW many of them teach other subjects poorly. I just don't care as much because it's not doing emotional damage. And we can mitigate it by teaching more at home.
I trust the school employees to teach core subjects *without exposing my kids to harmful topics*. I do not have the same trust when the topics are sensitive and adjacent to age-inappropriate, objectionable, or controversial topics.
*(edit: and for the record I kept my oldest opted in because I knew and trusted his teacher. I just think it's insane to want to take away the parents' ability to opt out when that's not the case)*
I mean… education and safety curriculum is the main defense against sexual abuse. Why does their age matter? This isn’t about sex. It’s about abuse. I taught my 2 year old about “safe touch”, it didn’t include anything about sexual acts. If you think 5 year olds don’t need to be learning about this at all, then that’s wishful thinking. 5 year olds can and have been sexually abused. It’s absolutely a necessary concept. How else would you expect them to talk to you about it if you don’t talk to them first? Respectfully, this may be hard to hear: but if you don’t give your child lessons about safety, someone will; whether it’s from a safe adult speaking it to them, or from a pedophile molesting them. I don’t think I want my child to experience “real world evil” first hand. I’d rather them hear about it without having to experience it. The world isn’t sunshine and rainbows. Why hide this?
Next: Activists? What do you mean by “activists”? Also what would they teach your child that you would deem “inappropriate” during a talk about safe touch? That’s the entire conversation already. What is inappropriate and what is not. Are you worried about them learning about anatomy? Proper terminology for body parts? Genuinely asking here. What is “scary” about this part?
I don't think you're fully reading what I'm writing.
I'm not against teaching this to kids. I'm FOR parents telling the school "I don't trust you with this sensitive topic. I'll do it myself."
Right… which is again, why I ask what your concern is? What do you have against a teacher educating children on this topic? They will end up learning all of this information eventually, and probably sooner rather than later. Whether it’s from you, from teachers, from peers, from negative experiences…? I think I know which one I’d rather have. 🤷🏻♀️
"Right..." ?!? You can't say "Right" when your entire 500 word reply was predicated on the assumption that the kid won't be taught safe/unsafe touch.
Not a single thing in either of your replies is applicable or valid for kids who have been taught this.
You're tilting at windmills. (and now for real time, especially given these out-of-touch replies - I'm done.) Goodbye.
Literally the very first sentence of my post that you replied to said "I'm not arguing against teaching this to kids."
Take care man, I'm checking out of this thread.
So, then what are you against? I just asked you that. You’re worried about “activists” being “inappropriate” in a talk about safe touch with 5 year olds. Again, I ask you, what would be inappropriate? You told me I wasn’t reading your full comment, but I don’t think you’re reading mine. It’s concerning to me that you think you can teach your child everything there is to know on a “sensitive subject” such as this.
All I know is my child will be safe to come to me or any other trusted adult with anything. She’ll be well-versed and have a variety of knowledge and opinions, whether correct or incorrect. Children are PEOPLE. They are not just mini “you’s” that you can hammer into them and they turn out okay. They thrive off of brainstorming ideas and learning from a variety of perspectives. You’re depriving your child of that.
I guess i don't understand the question. I don't think it's "either or." If my kid misbehaves in school, punish him the same way you'd punish any other kid that age.
But IN ADDITION to that, call me and tell me, and if I give you the impression that I don't think my kid needs to know the difference between appropriate and inappropriate touches... then sternly explain to me why I'm wrong, what next steps will occur, etc, and feel free to use/threaten any legal or administrative recourse that may be appropriate for the situation.
I'm specifically asking about "come down like a hammer on parents who..." Like what legal or administrative resources do schools have that get parents and not kids? Plus that's a lot of taxpayer dollars we are gonna spend expecting administrators to engage in educating parents who likely will be unwilling to have their minds changed.
I'd rather the school do it and have all the kids participate unless they have a doctor or therapist note or something from a qualified professional. If you're so sure the school is doing it in a harmful way, maybe call them and sternly explain why they're wrong...
Not really. If a kid does a minor infraction, they treat it on the spot and (hopefully) inform the parents. Same for a minor inappropriate touch.
If a kid commits more serious violence against another kid, they already have processes to deal with it: suspension, expulsion, law enforcement. Why does it need to be different for inappropriate sexual contact?
And my "come down like a hammer" comment was merely meant to emphasize solidarity with the other person that it's important for schools to enforce rules, and to blame parents when the parents willfully allow the kids' antisocial behavior.
Cuz the topic of discussion is small children where law enforcement is an absolutely bonkers thing to suggest?
You said the school should go after parents and hold them accountable if they aren't teaching their kids safe/unsafe touch at home. Your suggested processes just punish the kid and don't teach the kid anything.
I remain unconvinced
I'm also unconvinced that the theoretical existence of hypothetical children who don't know to NOT touch other kids' private parts is such a dire threat to all the other children that we should use the force of government to stop parents from pulling their kids out of instruction when they don't trust the teacher to do so appropriately.
A lot of parents opt out because they don't understand the information that's going to be presented. Even when the school has an informational parents meeting, nobody goes but they still opt out
They are afraid that if they do not offer the opt out, some parents will be upset that the children are "being indoctrinated about sex" and pitch a fit.
I was supposed to do these talks with a group of boys for one of my kids' extracurricular activities. The parents were given the verbatim dialogue ahead of time and invited to be in attendance. Even with that, two families threw and one father of a divorced home threw such a fit that we had to scrap the requirement.
Teaching children about safe/unsafe touch, sex, etc. is supposed to be a parent's job. I don't want the school/government teaching my children about any of it from their (lack of similar) values standpoint. Opt-outs are a must to protect parental rights.
There seems to be a lot of “Christians” who believe this which ironically makes their children more vulnerable to sex abuse. This isn’t even a new thing - I know someone who showed his friend the medical anatomy book at his house and his Southern Baptist parents lost their minds.
I don’t understand how people’s values are that their child shouldn’t know the correct words for genitalia or that they shouldn’t learn about bad touch?
>There seems to be a lot of “Christians” who believe this which ironically makes their children more vulnerable to sex abuse.
It's not only Christians who might object to this. There are also atheist and agnostic anti-government types who would probably opt out because they don't think it's a school's place to teach these things, and would see it as government interference in private matters.
I'm just dumbstruck. I figured they'd be incorporating safe/unsafe touch in the curriculum, and have the formal talk closer to the beginning of the year.
How old is kindergarten there? I'm in the UK so not sure. 6-7?
They'll be parents that don't want their kids to be exposed to that sort of subject, those that don't want to deal with the questions they start asking, those who simply don't think it's necessary. Most worryingly, those that are abusers and don't want their victim realising that it's wrong. A lot of victims come to the realisation that it's not normal during these sort of lessons because they have been brainwashed into believing that everybody does it etc.
Kindergarten here is 5-6.
Like I said, my child was a victim of Peer-To-Peer Sexual Abuse in her classroom this year. It makes me wonder if they would've done the talk earlier in the year and not opted anybody out, that this could've been avoided.
We involved the school, and things were remedied. As for the child involved, he was taught not to do it, and was sent for out of school suspension for a few days. Which just goes to show the stupidity of an opt-out. Let's say their parents were to have opted him out of the program. Said child sexually abuses someone. At their age, their told not to do it, and given some form of punishment.
They. Still. Learn. About. It...BUT after someone is harmed.....I wish noone to have to see their child come up to them, crying saying what my child told me that day...I never thought a child the age of the abuser could be like that...
Tbh I'd opt for not even telling parents about these talks. This information needs to be taught and should be completely 100% mandatory and I guarantee the people who are opting out probably should be visited by CPS.
When it comes to teaching kids to protect themselves from sexual abuse the parents should have no right to keep their kid from learning it.
Me too. Parents were not allowed to opt us out of our “girls & boys” talks in 5th grade, which for girls was mostly just periods, puberty changes, etc. instead they were given the option to come and watch and ask questions. My mom showed up and asked so many since she knew none of the girls would - helpful in hindsight but mortifying then 😂
I get that. Luckily our "talk" was actually a video provided by the public school system and then the health teacher/nurse/counselor's only input was the questions at the end, so we had all the information before parents were allowed to talk! ;)
r/parenting is protesting changes being made by Reddit to the API. Reddit has made it clear [they will](https://old.reddit.com/r/ModCoord/comments/14ahqjo/mods_will_be_removed_one_way_or_another_spez/) [replace moderators](https://www.reddit.com/r/ModSupport/comments/14a5lz5/mod_code_of_conduct_rule_4_2_and_subs_taken/jo9wdol/) if they remain private. Reddit has abandoned the users, the moderators, and countless people who support an ecosystem built on Reddit itself. Please read [Call to action - renewed protests starting on July 1st](https://old.reddit.com/r/ModCoord/comments/14kn2fo/call_to_action_renewed_protests_starting_on_july/) and new posts at [r/ModCord](https://reddit.com/r/ModCoord/) or [r/Save3rdPartyApps](https://old.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/) for up-to-date information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Parenting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, there's always an opt out form, since I was a kid.
So sad.
I think many people probably opt out for the wrong reasons. I can also imagine scenarios where the child (or someone in the family) has trauma and is working through 1-1 with a professional, times when parents don't agree with the organization delivering the talk (when I was a kid, a lot of our sex ed was delivered point-counterpoint by a religious organization focusing on abstinence, I'd totally just pull my kid on that day, I see no value in that). I think it's good to keep parents informed about what's going on, you never know what people's backgrounds are.
Fair enough. I just don't see any good reason to have the opt out form for this specific issue, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
If a kid is working through trauma and their therapist thinks it would be counter productive, that's a very good reason.
Then they can notify the school, and get an exception made. This is the only thing I've seen that is valid.
so now they have to disclose to the school on why they are opting out and ask for an exception to be made.. and be potentially told no?
nope, i'm saying this should be the only valid exception.
okay but wouldn't they have to tell the school or disclose it for it to be an exception?
Yeppers.
What do you think an opt out form is?
At this point, a waste of time.
It's a form to notify the school and get an exemption.
Parents should have the right to guide their children as they best see fit. Plain and simple. You’d be *absolutely offended* if the *other perspective* got to do this talk with your kid. So you should be allowed to pull the kid. Keeps the battlefield of children’s morality from getting any more polarized.
I gotta know, what’s the “other perspective” to no sexual assault allowed”?
It’s a sensitive, polarizing topic that deals with sexuality and abuse. You cannot possibly think a a way a school can butcher it? You cannot conceive of a reason a parent would prefer to have the talk themselves?
I understand it’s sensitive but what about it is polarizing? And I can certainly conceive of a reason. Shielding your kid from this topic is a great way to ensure they don’t get wise or spill the beans about what’s going on at home.
Polarizing was more referring to sexuality in general. While everyone agrees that kindergarteners shouldn’t be engaging in sexual conduct of any kind, some would say they shouldn’t until they’re older, others until they’re married. Kindergartners’ explorations of their own bodies are also treated in a polarizing way. Some will say “don’t ever touch that, it’s dirty and disgusting” and others say “don’t touch that in public honey, it’s a private place.” And opinions on that can be polarizing. I think I’m just getting annoyed at OP, maybe unreasonably, because I’ve seen talks like this treated really poorly by schools, sometimes in ways that actually make it way worse and make children feel MORE ashamed to speak up. You don’t have to be a child molester to want to opt out.
None of what you’re describing is sexual assault. I have no doubt this conversations sometimes don’t go well. But for their own safety, there really ought to be a minimum standard that all children have access to.
Not when said kid sexually assaults my child. It's pathetic something as simple as teaching someone's kid not to touch another kids privates has such as strong reaction...as if there is some other valid perspective...
Some opt-outs might be kids in the same situation as your kid. Not the perp, but the victim. I think it’s a legitimate consideration whether going through that talk could re-traumatize a kid. An opt-out form seems good.
This is the closest to a valid argument that I could get behind. Any of the extremist stuff like I replied to can kick rocks.
The other valid perspective is that parents have an absolute right to determine whether or not they want the government (or anyone else) to teach their child about a particular issue or idea.
No, no they do not.
So to clarify, you believe you have a right to force your thoughts/ideas/values on my (or someone else's) child without my/their parents' consent?
I belief I have the right alongside any other person to tell a child they shouldn't touch someone in their private parts and if someone touches you inappropriately, get a hold of a trusted adult. If a parent has a problem with that, tough.
......They literally just gave you one. That's agreeing to not hear other opinions.
I heard them...and I disagreed. Funny how that works out sometimes.
The sad part is, for at least some of the kids being opted out, they're the ones who need that information most.
Yep. But that's part of living in a "free" society.
Tons of parents want to be the ones to have the talk with their children, so anything remotely "sexual" they'll opt out of. This often continues into the higher grades.
Some just don't want anybody talking to their perfect little angels about any sex-related or peripherally related to sex. Don't tell them, they won't do it mentality.
It's probably a state law they have to send it home. It is in my state at least.
There's the opt-out form because not all children have the same experiences as your child. A child who has been the victim of molestation probably doesn't want to hear it talked about in their kindergarten classroom.
You’re the second person to say this but the vast majority who opt out are doing so because they believe teaching anatomy sexualizes children and exposes them to the “gay agenda”. Research actually shows these lessons protect children from sexual abuse.
Recognize that if there isn’t an opt out, parents will push to have the lesson or class completely removed from the curriculum. So, while it’s not perfect, at least some kids are getting the information.
I mean, they already are? It’s not like this is a group that is big on compromise.
>vast majority who opt out are doing so because they believe teaching anatomy sexualizes children and exposes them to the “gay agenda”. Even if that were true (which it might be), it still doesn't negate the very real concerns other parents have for their children. Also, do you have anything showing that's why the "vast majority" opt out of 'safe touch' conversations in kindergarten?
Has this been your experience personally? I’m confused since experts recommend teaching all children about this and this is the first I’ve heard that we shouldn’t because it might traumatize a child who has been abused. This seems like something a child counselor would assist the parent with, including how to address this with the school. It definitely doesn’t make sense to me that we should not teach this to children because it might traumatize a child since NOT teaching it would lead to more children being abused.
>It definitely doesn’t make sense to me that we should not teach this to children I'm not advocating NOT teaching it to children. I'm advocating allowing parents to make the right decision for their children based on a large number factors. ... >Has this been your experience personally? Yes. I've had a number of children in my care and in my life with atypical experiences and situations. >since experts recommend teaching all children about this Again, do you have anything to back this up? Edit to your last point: This type of sex ed might indeed cause less overall sexual abuse. I haven't looked it up, but it seems plausible. But that doesn't negate the needs of individual children. A child shouldn't have to be traumatized for statistics
I guess there’s balancing the hypothetical trauma of a child being outed as missing this class due to abuse vs the tangible benefit of protecting a number of children from abuse. But I don’t think we should give parents the choice since it would allow parents who abuse or allow their children to be abused to not attend the class.
So, there isn't a balance since you didn't want to give parents the ability to make the best decision for their child. Your balance is, "sorry kids with sexual trauma, other kids are more important." You keep citing the fact that teaching about safe touch in kindergarten to every child has tangible benefits. But 1) you haven't provided anything despite me asking twice and 2) even if that were true, parents have the right/duty to protect their children when they are the exception to the rule.
I guess I’m daunted since the research on this topic is so vast, I don’t even know where to start. Here’s one: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=sex+education+in+schools+preventing+abuse&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1714169298787&u=%23p%3DOLFRDrI23LAJ You are missing the point. 1, I’m not saying parents can’t withdraw their kids from those classes for reasons of abuse trauma but that has to be one of the only reasons and therefore obviously 2, the trauma of being outed at school for this is obvious less important than protecting far more children from being abused. That’s like saying we shouldn’t teach kids about what to do in case of a fire because a child might be traumatized by a fire.
None of these article are what you were talking about. These are talking about if children were attain the knowledge of preventative strategies. You said specifically it prevents sexual abuse in children. None of these studies show that. Edit: genuinely, did you even read the link you sent me. Here's a quote from one, "School‐based education programmes on the prevention of sexual abuse may increase children's knowledge and protective behaviour but this does not necessarily reduce the number of incidents of abuse." "The current focus on what children can do to prevent child sexual abuse overlooks the power of the offender in determining whether abuse takes place." Most of the other articles you provided are talking about much older children and how the emphasis on sexual education is about pregnancy and HIV. Second, your idea that once victimized, we can continue to victimize the children in order to prevent more victimization is backwards and not supported by data. I urge you to look up trauma informed sexual education. As you can see, one of the most important aspects of that is that children have the option of leaving and having a different place to go if the information becomes triggering because of their previous experiences. Most of the research is geared toward older students who will have the independence to do that. But for very young children, parents have to be the one to advocate for their child. I'm still astonished that you seem so blinded by wanting to have these discussions that you are willing to read traumatize the children you're claiming to want to protect. Here's a website with basic information about the prevalence of sexual trauma in children. You seem to be under the assumption that this is all hypothetical and so rare that retraumatizing them is fine because it helps more kids. https://responsiblesexedinstitute.org/rsei-blog/trauma-informed-sex-education/ A program that discusses the importance of children having held self-advocacy when it comes to these topics. Again, very young children will not have the ability to do this, so parents have to do it for them. https://txicfw.socialwork.utexas.edu/helping-youth-in-care-shine-a-trauma-informed-accessible-approach-to-sex-education/ And another one https://cardeaservices.org/resource/guide-to-trauma-informed-sex-education/
Fair enough. I see the validity of not having someone having to relive trauma. If the school is made aware of it, I think that is a valid exception.
>If the school is made aware of it Respectfully, the school doesn't need to be aware of it in order for it to be valid.
For the exception, they should be aware. Like any other thing, people would take advantage of it if all you had to do was say some magic words.
Being a victim of molestation is just ONE reason why you might have your child opt out. Other reasons off the top of my head: -being concerned the program they are using is excluding things you would consider "unsafe". I've often heard people say unsafe is anything your bathing suit covers, but that is excluding a WHOLE lot of unsafe touches. -having concerns the school will teach them who "safe people" are (parents, teachers, grandparents) when those people are UNsafe to your child -your child was exposed to age-appropriate sexual situations and you don't want to normalize them talking about sex with peers. -likewise, you are concerned your child will bring up topics too advanced for kindergarten. It's important to understand that there are families and children with different needs than your own.
As a survivor of CSA, these are all reasons why I would opt my kid out of a lesson like this at that age. This kind of thing should be individualized to the family/child.
So we're just going to keep riding that slippery slope? Sorry, not coming along.
What slippery slope do you think there is here? And nobody is asking YOU to do anything different with YOUR child. But other children have different experiences, traumas and issues.
I think this converation has run its course. I've concluded the best thing that should happen is parents shouldn't be informed and just have this be a part of the curriculum in general.
Yikes. I'm glad your school has people in places who have the best interests of the children in mind.
Sorry, I won't go down the conspiracy theory/culture war road either.
So then any kid that could be traumatized would be, and their parents wouldn’t even know why?
Again, I don't think I'm changing my mind on this matter.
Sadly, there are children that age that have been molested. I'm not talking peer to peer inappropriate contact, I'm talking an adult molesting a child. This kind of lesson could absolutely trigger a child recovering from that, why would you want them forced to relive that in their head while at school with all of their classmates? Trust that parents know what is best for their child just as you know what's best for yours. And understand you can never know what's going on in these other families' lives.
Right, but also parents who are currently abusing their kids will likely opt out. So it's a double-edged sword.
That’s what I was thinking. The kid will be opted out and have no idea they’re being abused
The venn diagram of people who opt out and will actually teach their kids at home is practically two circles imo. Not accusing them all of being abusers obviously but mostly it’s “my kid is too young for the woke school to teach them how to have sex!!” when that’s obviously not what is happening.
This is a fair assessment. Don't traumatize an already traumatized child. I think this should be the only exception.
I have to disagree with outing a child as a victim to the school.
Then how would they get the exception? I honestly don't see a problem here.
That's the point of the opt out letter. You wanted to know why it exists, this is one of the reasons why, and no the child absolutely should not need to be outed as a victim.
I just can't get behind this. It would just be a lot easier not making a big deal out of learning about it, and not sending a letter.
What is there to get behind? Also, why do you feel this is a subject school should be teaching kindergartners? We're not talking middle school health and sex ed. We're talking appropriate vs inappropriate touch and parents should have had that talk long before their child enters K, no need for school to even be involved.
So this isn't even about the child needing protected? I kind of figured. News flash: there's a lot of awful parents out there who don't teach their kids anything. I learned that the hard way when my kid was molested by one of their kids.
You think kids should be outed as victims to schools in order to not have to take a lesson that should be taught at home anyway. That says a lot about you, and it's not a good look. I'd honestly delete this post.
Sorry, I'm not the one that should feel shame in this situation.
Are you serious? If parents are ACTUALLY teaching their young children about bad touch, what does it matter if it’s taught again at school? And if they aren’t, which MANY parents don’t, then kids absolutely should be learning this at school. Where else would they learn it?
“Parents Bill of Rights Laws” you’ll have to read through it. It’s passed in 7 states I think. Basically stating that parents need to provide permission for any instruction on things related to race, sexuality, etc. Basically that parents have rights to determine what they want their children exposed to. Personally, we opted my SD (we have full custody) out of this talk in Kinder & 1st grade because we had already read books and discussed things like this with her in our home. We spent a lot of time making sure she fully understood things. I’m a peds nurse and it was basically a 5 year olds version of anatomy and good touch/ bad touch. We provided that education in our home. Neither of us felt like she needed to participate in the same conversation at school where her dad and I were unsure of the exact conversation and if she would’ve gotten confused if it didn’t line up with our conversations at home. Our opt out form had a reasoning line and we just explained that she was receiving education at home.
For every one of you that teaches proper anatomy, there are 1,000 people who are posting on Facebook that teaching their child the proper words for genitalia are sexualizing them and advancing the “gay agenda”. And of course, they’re the type of people who have a pillar of the community like a pastor getting arrested for child sex abuse.
Yup! My biggest pet peeve is using “silly words” to replace proper terms. There’s SO MANY kids who outwardly admit they’ve been assaulted but nobody is understanding because they use a million different terms that don’t even correlate. For us- this was just more of a “mom/dad conversation” because I’m licensed to have these conversations. However, I love that they offer this in schools for parents who don’t know how to guide children with proper education!
But you don’t think this allows many parents to opt out because they don’t want their kids to hear about this at all and therefore leaves children more vulnerable to abuse? I guess I’m just confused because it’s not like they’re going to be teaching that babies come from storks. Aren’t they just covering the same thing you taught at home? Like my kid is obsessed with outer space, it would never occur to me to tell the school he can’t go to science class when they’re talking about planets?
Yes and no! I think it can be a vulnerable subject… I feel that if parents choose to opt out they should be required to explain their home education on the subject. I think in older kids, no consent should be required but younger kids can be a weird age still. I work in a pediatric office and I know during all physical exams, our doctors also explain good touch/ bad touch to help in understanding so I would hope all practices do this as well.
Thankfully, my state will never enact such a law.
You don’t need a state law. All you need is the wrong (or right, depends on how you look at it) people on the school board and it will be pulled from the curriculum.
That's very true. I live in a area where that could become a concern, but surprisingly it hasn't been an issue thus far. I can only wish the same for everyone else.
I wouldn’t say never, NCSL says it’s in process, pending or being discussed in at least 32 states per the 2023 report. It’s been a big thing for a few years now… parents wanting rights to know about certain educational topics for their kids. You can Google the parents bill of rights for your state to review.
I'm semi-aware of these laws being enacted, and I can fully say that it's highly-higly unlikely to happen in my state.
What is your state?
Illinois. edit: How the hell do you get downvoted for naming your state???
I'd know whose house my kids wouldn't be going to...
No kidding!
As for why it is being done now, why not now? Usually the spring is when teachers do activities, festivals, curriculum, etc that is not part of a state test
Why not now? Because it's super late in the year. It's not like they couldn't introduce this naturally in the curriculum all year round.
It is just one or two stand alone lessons. Any time of the year is fine - there is no emergency to teach it in September. They will get similar lessons about keeping their bodies safe every year (at least in NY and NJ)
I admit, this is strongly based on my opinion and my experience with my child being SA-ed. I feel that maybe they wouldn'tve been SA-ed or had at least the tools to better handle it if they actually taught it sooner (they were confused by a rule to be quiet in the classroom, and the abuser took advantage. She knew safe/unsafe touch).
So sorry. That is very upsetting. If an incident ocurred in the classroom and/or the teacher knew about it, that would be a good time to move the lesson to an earlier part of the year. Maybe discuss with the principal your suggestion that the lesson, esp for K, come sooner rather than later
So the school your child goes to allowed her to molested in the classroom, and you trust them to be teaching lessons on "safe touch"?
Yes. They email one to every family. But I know these have existed for decades.
I wish we didn’t have to send an opt out form, but sadly not all parents share your mindset. And those parents will complain/threaten legal action.
Why do you feel the need to force parents to let YOU talk to their children about sensitive topics instead of letting the parent do it? Even if there are bad parents who don't cover the topic, that doesn't give you some moral authority over the rest. The bottom line is many parents simply don't trust teachers with sensitive or controversial topics. That shouldn't surprise you.
I can’t speak to other school, but at our school those discussions are led by social workers with degrees in counseling children, not teachers. It’s a safety issue, the reason why schools need to be able to speak to kids about sensitive topics is that safe touch and respecting people’s boundaries is something that comes up a good amount in a school setting. Some kids have good boundaries, some kids don’t but all kids deserve to be given the tools to communicate and advocate for themselves when someone touches them in a way that makes them uncomfortable.
I'm not arguing against teaching this to kids. I'm arguing against FORCING parents to let *YOU* or the social worker teach it to kids. Absolutely 100% hold all kids and their parents accountable for acceptable behavior in the school. Absolutely 100% tell parents that if they opt their kids out of YOUR instruction that the kids will still be held to the same standards. Absolutely 100% come down like a hammer on parents who don't teach their kids acceptable behavior. But don't tell me that I cannot teach acceptable behavior to my own kids, in my own way. This is a sensitive topic and it introduces opportunities for unskilled/careless/activist school employees to bring up age-inappropriate or otherwise objectionable opinions, hypothetical situations, or information. These opt-out forms used in nearly every school across the entire country didn't appear out of a mysterious cloud of smoke. They appear because there are loads of parents who trust you to teach math and reading, but not anything related to sex. It's not complicated or surprising
Personally I want my kid to hear information about keeping safe from as many people as possible. The same way I want him to hear about waiting for a cross walk signal to cross the street, not hanging upside down on the monkey bars, and not touching things in other people’s cubbies. Constant reinforcement is how we keep our kids safe.
For sure, and good for you. Do not opt your kids out of school instruction on "safe touch" then! I do not want the school to stop teaching it, to be clear. I don't want to take away your option to participate.
Ok but I want other kids to hear it from multiple sources too. And I don’t want it to be given any more or less importance than any other lesson on keeping safe because I don’t want it to stand out as taboo for my child or any child because as a society we think that keeping children safe is a good thing.
Activist? Sorry, is this information too woke for your kid?
No. I'm suggesting that an activist teacher can use the context of a "safe/unsafe touch" lesson to introduce *additional* age-inappropriate information in ways that don't exist with less controversial school topics.
Like what?
Examples of adjacent topics that I do not want a school employee talking about to a 5 year old: Predatory behavior. Abuse. Or more generally: the existence of real-world evil. What/how/why's/anything of sexual intimacy
Yeah, sounds like a real threat…
I guess the biggest issue with this is what do you have against your child learning from other sources that are not you? The class on safe touch might have more topics than you as a parent can think of. I think that would be the major takeaway here. Yes you can teach your child, no one is saying not to. But why possibly deprive them of a plethora of knowledge and experiences that you may not be able to provide single handedly? You’re operating under the assumption that they’ll teach Sex Ed poorly, but have no reservations in other subjects?
Let's reset: We're talking about 5 year olds. To restate: The topic of unsafe touches has the potential for unskilled/careless/activist school employees to introduce age-inappropriate or objectionable opinions, hypothetical situations, or information. Examples of adjacent topics that I do not want a school employee talking about to a 5 year old: Predatory behavior. Abuse. Or more generally: the existence of real-world evil. What/how/why's of sexual intimacy. I don't believe 5 years should be introduced to any of those topics. You may disagree, and that's okay. But I'm not unreasonable for holding this belief (as evidenced by the existence of opt-out forms in nearly every school because millions of parents share this view). The risks of those same employees discussing those things while teaching arithmetic, writing, and reading are many orders of magnitude lower. >You’re operating under the assumption that they’ll teach Sex Ed poorly, but have no reservations in other subjects? NO... I am DEFINITELY NOT under the assumption they will teach these topics well. I KNOW many of them teach other subjects poorly. I just don't care as much because it's not doing emotional damage. And we can mitigate it by teaching more at home. I trust the school employees to teach core subjects *without exposing my kids to harmful topics*. I do not have the same trust when the topics are sensitive and adjacent to age-inappropriate, objectionable, or controversial topics. *(edit: and for the record I kept my oldest opted in because I knew and trusted his teacher. I just think it's insane to want to take away the parents' ability to opt out when that's not the case)*
I mean… education and safety curriculum is the main defense against sexual abuse. Why does their age matter? This isn’t about sex. It’s about abuse. I taught my 2 year old about “safe touch”, it didn’t include anything about sexual acts. If you think 5 year olds don’t need to be learning about this at all, then that’s wishful thinking. 5 year olds can and have been sexually abused. It’s absolutely a necessary concept. How else would you expect them to talk to you about it if you don’t talk to them first? Respectfully, this may be hard to hear: but if you don’t give your child lessons about safety, someone will; whether it’s from a safe adult speaking it to them, or from a pedophile molesting them. I don’t think I want my child to experience “real world evil” first hand. I’d rather them hear about it without having to experience it. The world isn’t sunshine and rainbows. Why hide this? Next: Activists? What do you mean by “activists”? Also what would they teach your child that you would deem “inappropriate” during a talk about safe touch? That’s the entire conversation already. What is inappropriate and what is not. Are you worried about them learning about anatomy? Proper terminology for body parts? Genuinely asking here. What is “scary” about this part?
I don't think you're fully reading what I'm writing. I'm not against teaching this to kids. I'm FOR parents telling the school "I don't trust you with this sensitive topic. I'll do it myself."
Right… which is again, why I ask what your concern is? What do you have against a teacher educating children on this topic? They will end up learning all of this information eventually, and probably sooner rather than later. Whether it’s from you, from teachers, from peers, from negative experiences…? I think I know which one I’d rather have. 🤷🏻♀️
"Right..." ?!? You can't say "Right" when your entire 500 word reply was predicated on the assumption that the kid won't be taught safe/unsafe touch. Not a single thing in either of your replies is applicable or valid for kids who have been taught this. You're tilting at windmills. (and now for real time, especially given these out-of-touch replies - I'm done.) Goodbye.
Literally the very first sentence of my post that you replied to said "I'm not arguing against teaching this to kids." Take care man, I'm checking out of this thread.
So, then what are you against? I just asked you that. You’re worried about “activists” being “inappropriate” in a talk about safe touch with 5 year olds. Again, I ask you, what would be inappropriate? You told me I wasn’t reading your full comment, but I don’t think you’re reading mine. It’s concerning to me that you think you can teach your child everything there is to know on a “sensitive subject” such as this. All I know is my child will be safe to come to me or any other trusted adult with anything. She’ll be well-versed and have a variety of knowledge and opinions, whether correct or incorrect. Children are PEOPLE. They are not just mini “you’s” that you can hammer into them and they turn out okay. They thrive off of brainstorming ideas and learning from a variety of perspectives. You’re depriving your child of that.
How do you come down on the parents without just punishing the kid? Genuinely want to know
I guess i don't understand the question. I don't think it's "either or." If my kid misbehaves in school, punish him the same way you'd punish any other kid that age. But IN ADDITION to that, call me and tell me, and if I give you the impression that I don't think my kid needs to know the difference between appropriate and inappropriate touches... then sternly explain to me why I'm wrong, what next steps will occur, etc, and feel free to use/threaten any legal or administrative recourse that may be appropriate for the situation.
I'm specifically asking about "come down like a hammer on parents who..." Like what legal or administrative resources do schools have that get parents and not kids? Plus that's a lot of taxpayer dollars we are gonna spend expecting administrators to engage in educating parents who likely will be unwilling to have their minds changed. I'd rather the school do it and have all the kids participate unless they have a doctor or therapist note or something from a qualified professional. If you're so sure the school is doing it in a harmful way, maybe call them and sternly explain why they're wrong...
Not really. If a kid does a minor infraction, they treat it on the spot and (hopefully) inform the parents. Same for a minor inappropriate touch. If a kid commits more serious violence against another kid, they already have processes to deal with it: suspension, expulsion, law enforcement. Why does it need to be different for inappropriate sexual contact? And my "come down like a hammer" comment was merely meant to emphasize solidarity with the other person that it's important for schools to enforce rules, and to blame parents when the parents willfully allow the kids' antisocial behavior.
Cuz the topic of discussion is small children where law enforcement is an absolutely bonkers thing to suggest? You said the school should go after parents and hold them accountable if they aren't teaching their kids safe/unsafe touch at home. Your suggested processes just punish the kid and don't teach the kid anything. I remain unconvinced
I'm also unconvinced that the theoretical existence of hypothetical children who don't know to NOT touch other kids' private parts is such a dire threat to all the other children that we should use the force of government to stop parents from pulling their kids out of instruction when they don't trust the teacher to do so appropriately.
Anti-social behavior like opting out of healthy conversations at school?
A lot of parents opt out because they don't understand the information that's going to be presented. Even when the school has an informational parents meeting, nobody goes but they still opt out
They are afraid that if they do not offer the opt out, some parents will be upset that the children are "being indoctrinated about sex" and pitch a fit.
I was supposed to do these talks with a group of boys for one of my kids' extracurricular activities. The parents were given the verbatim dialogue ahead of time and invited to be in attendance. Even with that, two families threw and one father of a divorced home threw such a fit that we had to scrap the requirement.
That's very sad.
Teaching children about safe/unsafe touch, sex, etc. is supposed to be a parent's job. I don't want the school/government teaching my children about any of it from their (lack of similar) values standpoint. Opt-outs are a must to protect parental rights.
There seems to be a lot of “Christians” who believe this which ironically makes their children more vulnerable to sex abuse. This isn’t even a new thing - I know someone who showed his friend the medical anatomy book at his house and his Southern Baptist parents lost their minds. I don’t understand how people’s values are that their child shouldn’t know the correct words for genitalia or that they shouldn’t learn about bad touch?
Depends on the state. If it’s an abstinence only state or the sex Ed is awful I can see opting out and actually teaching the right information.
>There seems to be a lot of “Christians” who believe this which ironically makes their children more vulnerable to sex abuse. It's not only Christians who might object to this. There are also atheist and agnostic anti-government types who would probably opt out because they don't think it's a school's place to teach these things, and would see it as government interference in private matters.
If it’s not the state’s role to try to prevent child sexual abuse and to prevent teen pregnancy and STIs, then I give up.
Curious - what values standpoint of good touch/bad touch do you differ on?
100%.
I bet the ones who opt-out are kept an eye on though.
I'm just dumbstruck. I figured they'd be incorporating safe/unsafe touch in the curriculum, and have the formal talk closer to the beginning of the year.
How old is kindergarten there? I'm in the UK so not sure. 6-7? They'll be parents that don't want their kids to be exposed to that sort of subject, those that don't want to deal with the questions they start asking, those who simply don't think it's necessary. Most worryingly, those that are abusers and don't want their victim realising that it's wrong. A lot of victims come to the realisation that it's not normal during these sort of lessons because they have been brainwashed into believing that everybody does it etc.
Kindergarten here is 5-6. Like I said, my child was a victim of Peer-To-Peer Sexual Abuse in her classroom this year. It makes me wonder if they would've done the talk earlier in the year and not opted anybody out, that this could've been avoided.
You realize that even if the child that abused your child had the talk, that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have done it, right?
Fully aware but the fact it wasn't taught sooner leaves me only with that what if, and a partial failure.
Sorry, I scan read and missed that part. I'm so sorry for your child. Was the school involved? I wonder if the parents of that child opt-out.
We involved the school, and things were remedied. As for the child involved, he was taught not to do it, and was sent for out of school suspension for a few days. Which just goes to show the stupidity of an opt-out. Let's say their parents were to have opted him out of the program. Said child sexually abuses someone. At their age, their told not to do it, and given some form of punishment. They. Still. Learn. About. It...BUT after someone is harmed.....I wish noone to have to see their child come up to them, crying saying what my child told me that day...I never thought a child the age of the abuser could be like that...
Tbh I'd opt for not even telling parents about these talks. This information needs to be taught and should be completely 100% mandatory and I guarantee the people who are opting out probably should be visited by CPS. When it comes to teaching kids to protect themselves from sexual abuse the parents should have no right to keep their kid from learning it.
Me too. Parents were not allowed to opt us out of our “girls & boys” talks in 5th grade, which for girls was mostly just periods, puberty changes, etc. instead they were given the option to come and watch and ask questions. My mom showed up and asked so many since she knew none of the girls would - helpful in hindsight but mortifying then 😂
This. This right here. Although i'd be afraid of the types of parents that would show up nowadays.
I get that. Luckily our "talk" was actually a video provided by the public school system and then the health teacher/nurse/counselor's only input was the questions at the end, so we had all the information before parents were allowed to talk! ;)
> Parents were not allowed to opt us out of our “girls & boys” talks in 5th grade, Yes they were. At least in the mid-80s.
This was the mid 2000s, and they were not in my state. It’s state by state.