On June 14, 2023, the Ottawa Area Intermediate School District (OAISD) board unanimously voted to purchase a radical sex education curriculum for use by Young Adult Services (YAS) and Sheldon Pines School. YAS serves adults ages 18-26 with cognitive disabilities such as Down’s Syndrome and autism. Sheldon Pines serves severely emotionally impaired children. The children at Sheldon Pines have commonly suffered abuse and/or have very difficult home lives.
The radical sex education curriculum contains links to GLADD, Amaze, and National Council on Independent Living (NCIL) and it removes references to boy/girl, man/woman, and replaces them with phrases such as people with penises and people with vaginas. Here are links to Amaze videos and a previous article on the topic.
**********************WARNING******************
**************SEXUALLY EXPLICIT****************
Approximately twenty-five people attended the June meeting, and about fourteen parents and concerned citizens spoke in opposition to the proposed curriculum. Many of these parents are concerned their cognitively impaired children will misinterpret the curriculum and then act in sexually inappropriate ways that could result in them being even more isolated from society.
Here is a public comment from a parent of a student in the YAS program.
“I have a 21-year-old son with Down’s Syndrome who attends Holland Young Adult Services. Proposed curriculum videos through Amaze.org, GLAAD, NCIL (National Council on Independent Living) literally erases the terminology male and female, man and woman. The Amaze cartoon video on “What is an Abortion,” a large purple cartoon character, I can’t even describe what it is, states, “having an abortion is a very personal decision, and only the person who is pregnant can decide what is best.” It goes on to state that an abortion is a very safe medical procedure. In another video on sex, gender and genitals it states, “typically people have a penis with testicles, or people have a vagina and a vulva.” Evidently, we cannot call these people male or female anymore, or man or woman. I could go on and on with such examples.
My son has an uncomplicated way of thinking. When something motivates him, he focuses on that thing to the exclusion of everything else. For example, this is his journal from school this year. He focuses on events and people. The entire journal is the names of the people in his life everyday that he writes about. You cannot undo his thinking, because this is what motivates him. As I talked to other parents of children with cognitive disabilities over the years, I have found this is a very common trait; an obsession on favorite things or even on things that make a temporary pleasure but have negative consequences; an inability to connect cause and effect. As a parent, this is a constant reality and struggle of everyday life.
Now imagine a mind that is presented with videos of cartoon bunnies having sex, and condoms being purchased by that bunny wearing goofy glasses at the pharmacy, all while making sex seem like a cartoon character and using terminology that is in no way possible for the students within the OAISD YAS or my son to begin to comprehend. It will begin to bring curiosity and confusion and eventually will result in an obsession with sexual behavior because it looks so fun and just so funny. Sex re-education is an example of an experiment that has no true test of outcome. It will confuse the minds of those who are the most vulnerable and trusting with information that can only confuse them and will eventually hurt them and create isolation rather than inclusion in our society.”
A second YAS parent shared similar concerns. Here is her comment.
“My son is biologically 18 years old and has Down’s Syndrome. He has a cognitive impairment. His language is at a second-grade level. In the curriculum videos I watched, the speed at which the characters talk, the vocabulary they use, and the content they communicate are above his comprehension. However, as a strong visual learner, he will gain an impression from the videos. For example, in the video titled, “Are You Ready to have Sex,” the male character approaches the bed in his vision of himself is a superhero, while the girl in the bed envisions herself as a princess. My son, a capable athlete, does envision himself as strong, fast, and ready to play basketball with the NBA. What is this confusing video now visually showing him? That those visions of strength are for having sex or stalking a pretty girl who he sees as a princess.
The same method of using developmentally appropriate visuals such as princesses, or superheroes, or sports characters to explain sexual content to a person with a cognitive impairment, is used again in a video titled. “Consent Explained. What is it?” The characters agree to play baseball together, but when it comes to frisbee one character says no. So, the message that consent for physical expression and sexual activity has the same consequence as sports children play with their friends.
The concept of consent is difficult. Despite many conversations with my son explaining that you must ask someone’s permission before borrowing their things, he regularly takes his brother’s clothes and energy drinks. Consequences have little impact on teaching him to control his impulse to take things that he believes look good, or taste and feel good. Statements in the videos like “remember everyone’s personal sexual choices are valid and should be respected,” emphasize that if you believe it and it feels good, then it's okay. []
After participating in this curriculum, my son will absorb many visuals showing cartoon characters in bed; kissing, hugging, rabbits having sex, and demonstrations showing how to put a condom on a carrot, characters saying, “I’m excited to have sex,”. The impact of this curriculum on my son would not help protect him from negative or legal consequences, nor improve the quality of his life. This does not support the development of age-appropriate boundaries he needs to help him live a fulfilling life with fun and meaningful friendships by attending dances, sports and social events. The only therapy for him if he were to embrace or engage in sexual activities taught in this curriculum would be isolation to protect him from being a victim of sexual abuse.”
Another parent voiced her concerns.
“These children have super skills. They have an incredible memory, but they lack discernment, and they are cognitively and developmentally disabled. So, they are auditory, visual learners. If you show them something, it will stick. You cannot uncounsel them. You can’t do that. []
Do you understand the ramifications? If you do this to an individual who is already prone to anxiety, depression, and ritualistic repetitive behavior because they are autistic, and now they have visions in their head that they cannot erase. What that’s going to do, is that will lead to increased incidents of anxiety and self-interest behavior. You are going to get increases in depression. The only people that are going to benefit is probably the community mental health where they are going to prescribe more medication to help put them to sleep.
So, let me just say something. In the curriculum it says, if you can’t sleep; masturbate. Okay, well some of these children have repetitive ritualistic behaviors, so you are talking about encouraging children that possibly could masturbate continuously. Some of these children will ejaculate in public. Part of their skill building is social skills. So, they are not able to separate what they are seeing and some of the emotions in the curriculum puts things in their minds and their bodies might react, and what that does is it puts them at risk to become social deviants.”
The board discussed the curriculum for approximately 25 minutes before unanimously approving the purchase. During public comments, several parents raised concerns regarding the legality of the sexual education advisory board (SEAB). One board member was not sure the legal statute applied to the OAISD. He stated, “I’m looking at the applicable section of the state code right now. As usual, these things are badly written. This section, 1507 doesn’t even apply to an intermediate school district. It defines school districts as being general school district, local school district, and separately defines intermediate school district.”
The primary concern of parents was the appropriateness of the curriculum, but this topic received little attention during the board discussion other than the following. It was disclosed that following the May 2023 meeting, concerns over the Amaze videos were brought back to the SEAB requesting they be removed from the curriculum, but the SEAB decided to let them remain part of the curriculum.
The state of Michigan requires educational institutions to provide sex education to all of their students. The ISD already has a sex education curriculum in place so there was no reason the board had to vote to approve purchase of this particular curriculum. However, some board members used this as an excuse for voting yes. One board member stated, “Here we have a room full of parents that expressed concern, but we have a whole lot more parents that are not addressing things at home with students. [] Personally, I believe all of this should be done at home, but when I put my board hat on, I know that’s not going to happen, and I know that there are a lot of parents that don’t want to do it, or don’t take the time, or maybe don’t care. So how am I servicing all of these students? The ones that have the support and the ones that don’t.”
This statement did not address the potential harm this curriculum could bring to children. It seems the concerns of the parents were greatly missed by the board. Parents primarily were concerned with the way the content would affect YAS students. School board officials seem to believe the option for parents to opt-out negates this concern. One board member stated, “Parents have the option to opt out of a portion or all of the curriculum.”
Another board member conveyed the same sentiment, but acknowledged that parents need to be aware of what is included in the curriculum in order for them to make an appropriate decision for their child. This board member stated, “The opt out is important and powerful, but it is useless if a parent receives barriers to learning exactly what’s in there [the curriculum].”
This board member understood one of the fundamental issues — transparency. A primary reason these parents attended the board meeting to voice their concerns is because they felt they were deceived. The district informed them of the curriculum change in the middle of a letter informing them of other policy changes. The curriculum was referred to as “Healthy Relationships,” and they were initially given limited time to view the curriculum during the work day. When they looked through the curriculum, they were shocked by the contrast in what they saw versus the way it was advertised. Healthy Relationships does not provide an accurate description of material included in this curriculum.
Parents heads hung low as they exited this meeting. They were shocked and disheveled. They were disappointed with the board's decision and worried about their children’s future.